This OCR text has been imported without a page scan and contains errors and page headers. You can help by finding and uploading a page scan, or correcting the errors.

This text has been imported with broken footnotes. They are in the middle of the prose, likely as *4, [4] or simple 4.

If you'd like to help, please place the text of the footnote inside the tags <ref>In this instance, the Lieutenant is referring to the woman's child.</ref>, and move it to the proper place in the text. Then add {{Footnotes}} to the very bottom of the page.

The identification suggested by ( a in the last-cited passage and adopted by Saadiah in his version of Isaiah is manifestly correct. The Wady of Egypt is not the Wady Ghazza (the torrens ^Egypti of William of Tyre, and perhaps Milton s stream that parts Egypt from Syrian ground ) but the Wady el- Arish, which with its deep water-course (only filled after heavy rains) starts from about the centre of the Sinaitic peninsula (near the Jebel et-Tlh), and after running N. and NW. finally reaches the sea at the Egyptian fort and town of el- Arish. Here, in late classical times, was an emporium of Nabataean traffic, to which the name Rhinocorura or Rhinocolura was given. Here, too, travellers halted on the route from Gaza to Pelusiurn. Titus rested here on his way to Jerusalem (Jos. BJ iv. US) and as late as the fourteenth century A. n. the place was much visited by travellers (Ibn Batuta). Owing to the fact that as the boundary of Egypt and Canaan we find in two OT passages (Josh. 183 i Ch. 13s ; see SHIHOR OF EGYPT) an arm of the Nile (the Pelusiac), and in a third passage (Gen. 15 18) the river (in:) of Egypt (which surely must mean the Wady el- Arish), some (following Abul- feda, Descr. sg., ed. Michaelis, 1776, p. 34, no. 68 ) 2 have supposed that the Wady el-Arish was taken for an intermittent channel of the Nile (cp Jer. on Am. 6 1 ; Reland, Pal. 285/1 9 6 9^)- Niebuhr the traveller, on the other hand, seeks the Torrent of Egypt in the largest of three small streams that run into the Mediterranean from the large lake (baheire] which, he says, extended from Damietta eastwards towards Gaza (Descr. de V Arable, 360^). All this speculation is need less. If a stream in the neighbourhood of el-Arish is referred to, it can only be the wild torrent-stream that in December suddenly covers the banks of the Wady el- Arlsh with verdure (cp Haynes, Palmer Search-expedi tion, 262), which could never have been confounded with a channel of the Nile (so also Ebers). As for the expression the river of Mizraim ( D nnj) in Gen. 15 18, either the original reading was Sro vvady, torrent (Lagarde, Ball), which was altered into inj, river (of ), by an idealistic editor, who placed the SW. boundary of Canaan at the Nile, or else, if Winckler s inference 3 from a Minasan inscription (Hal. 535) is correct, -in: was applied in N. Arabia and its Palestinian neighbour hood to the Wady el- Arish, which historically at any rate was not undeserving of the name. The latter view seems preferable. It seems to derive support from Gen. 8637 Nu. 22s when emended (see REHOBOTH, PETHOR).

We have still to account for the name ( The Wady [or Torrent] of Mizraim ). The ordinary explanation makes it equivalent to the wady which parts Canaan from Egypt. At the mouth of the wady la) an Egyptian fortress, which might seem to neutralise the fact that the wady belongs geographic ally to N. Arabia. That this explanation was prevalent in later Jewish times is certain ; but does it correctly represent the original meaning of that phrase? This question cannot be answered without considering the Assyriological data. That the nahal Musur of inscriptions of Sargon and Esarhaddon 1 means, not the Egyptian wady, but the wady which runs through the N. Arabian land of Musri, seems to us beyond doubt, unless, indeed, it can be shown that the extended use of the term Musri or Musur had gone out in that king s time. To assert this, however, would be entirely contrary to the evidence. Mizraim should rather be Mizrim . The land of Musri or Musur in N. Arabia was repeatedly referred to by the OT writers ; but the references were misunderstood by the later scribes. See MIZRAIM, 2 (6). T. K. c. s. A. c.

i. b. GERA \q.v. ], a Benjamite, the champion of Israel against Moab ( Judg. 3 12-30 ; avu8 [superscr. v] B a - b in 830 4i). The story is thoroughly archaic in tone, and is a popular tradition (so Moore, Bu. ). It tells how Ehud, with a sword concealed under his garment, came bearing tribute to Eglon, king of Moab, at his residence E. of the Jordan, and sought a private audience. Being left-handed he was able to get hold of his sword without exciting the king s suspicions. In this way he quickly wrought Israel s vengeance, and made good his escape. Fleeing by way of Gilgal and the pillars there (see QUARRIES) he called the Israelites to arms and, by seizing the Jordan fords, cut off the retreat of the Moabites on the W. of the river, and slew them every one. See EGLON.

The historicity of the narrative was questioned in 1869 by No. (Untersuch. 179), mainly on the ground that both Ehud and Gera are clan-names (cp 2, below). More recently, Wi. (Gesch. 1 158) has drawn attention to the improbability of a Benjamite having been tribute-bearer for Ephraim, and points out that there is little to support the existence of Benjamin before the time of Saul. But the mention of Ehud s origin is due, it would seem, to R D (so Moore, SBOT), and may very probably be a later trait. That the kernel of the story itself is not homogeneous has been shown by Wi. (Alttest. Vnt. 5$ ff.) , a satisfactory analysis has yet to be made. Cp BENJAMIN, 4.

Ekron, the most northerly of the five cities of the Philistines, was first identified by Robinson with the modern Akir, in 3i5i.s N. lat. , 4^ m. E. from Yefrnd (JABNEEL, i) and 9 m. from the sea ; in a pass which breaks the low hills that form the northern boundary of the Philistine plain (PEF map, Sh. xvi. ). Its position, inland, and not on the trunk, but on a branch, of the great line of traffic northwards, is probably the explanation of the fact that its name is found in the early Egyptian records of conquest and travel only once (Lists of Thotmes III. tfPW, 650) as Aqar. Not 25 rn. from Jerusalem as the crow flies, it lay nearer Israel than did any of its sister towns ; but, though it was assigned to Judah, with its towns and villages from Ekron to the sea (Josh. 1545/1 [P]), and again to Dan (ib. 1943 [P]). we find (ib. 132 [D, but probably from older sources]) all the regions of the Philistines as far as the north border of Kkron which is counted to the Canaanite specified as part of the much land that still remained to be possessed after the conquest, and this last representation best accords with all the known facts.

Like her sisters Ekron possessed, along with a market, the shrine and oracle of a deity BAALZEBUB (q.v.), 2 K. la. In i S. 5 10 612 / 16 it is said that from Ekron the ark was returned to the Israelites by the level road up the Vale of Sorek to Beth-shemesh, not 12 m. distant. <5 BI -, however, in this passage reads X<TKO.\UV [askalon] in each case for Ekron (cp 6 17 and see Dr. , H. P.Sm. , ad loc. ). Padi, king of Ekron, remained aloof from the general revolt of Philistia in 704 B.C. against Sennacherib, whose prism-inscription gives the name as Am-kar-ru-na. Padi s subjects delivered him to Hezekiah ; but Sennacherib in 701 restored him to his throne. The next notices of the town are by Esar-haddon (KAT(-), 164) and Asur-bani-pal (Del., Par. 289); and the next (apart from the general history of Philistia, Jer. 2520 Zeph. 24) not till i Mace. 10 89 (cp Jos. Ant. xiii. 44), where it is said to have been given in 147 B.C. by King Alexander Balas to Jonathan the Maccabee for services against Apollonius the general of Demetrius II. , an incident supposed by some, but on insufficient grounds, to be referred to in Zech. 95-7 (see, however, ZECHARIAH, BOOK OF).

After the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans Jews settled in Ekron. See OS (91 6 218 57) where it is spoken of as a large ( grandis, fteyion;) village between Azotus and Jamnia, Jerome adding that some identified Accaron with Tunis Stratonis (Caesarea). In noo A.D. King Baldwin marched from Jerusalem to Ascalon by Ashdod inter quam et Jamniam, qua; super mare sita est, Accaron dimisimus (Fulch. Carnot, 23, in Gest. Dei 404, quoted by Robinson ; cp Brocardus, 10 186 ; Marin. Sanut. 165).

When visited by the present writer in 1891 Afa rwHS a small but thriving village. It lies in a slight hollow by a well ; Petrie doubts whether the ancient city can have been of much size (PEFQ, go, p. 245). Built of mud, like most of the towns on the plain, it contains hardly any ancient remains (Robinson and PEFM 2 408). The plain about it is fertile but only partially cultivated ; the railway from Jaffa to Jerusalem passes to the north. G. A. S.

The connection between Hezekiah and Ekron has long attracted the attention of students. Sennacherib, whose reference to Padi, king of Ekron, has been already mentioned, states in the same inscription that as a punishment for Hezekiah's revolt he cut off parts of his territory and gave them to certain Philistine kings, one of whom was the king of Ekron. This statement has been taken by M Curdy to refer to certain towns and villages originally Philistine which Uzziah had taken from the Philistines (as the Chronicler probably means to assert in 2 Ch. 266), which Ahaz had lost (2 Ch. 28 18) and which, as we may infer from 2 K. 188 were retaken by Hezekiah. The earlier statement respecting the surrender of Padi implies, according to the same scholar, that Hezekiah was recognised by the people of Ekron as their suzerain (Expos., 1891 b, 389/1). So much at least appears to be highly probable, that in the early part of the reign of Hezekiah the king of Ekron was a vassal of the king of Judah, and that he regained his independence only through the humiliation inflicted on Hezekiah by Sen nacherib. Hezekiah, however, might console himself by the reflection that Ekron had been captured by the Assyrians and Jerusalem had not.

In the reigns of Esarhaddon and Asur-bani-pal we hear of a king of Ekron called Ikausu (with which WMM compares the name Achish), or Ikasamsu, who paid tribute to the great king (COT 241 KB 2149 240). Soon after this a Hebrew prophet declares that Ekron shall be rooted up, suggesting an etymology natural from an Israelite point of view, names being taken as prophetic of the fortunes of their bearers. The modern name Akir suggests the far more probable meaning 1 sterile (so Guthe ; cp Ar. akara, Heb. atdr). The dreary nature of the plain close to Ekron may serve to account for the name. G. A. s. , if. ; T. K. C. , 3.

2. Son of Baasha, king of Israel in Tirzah. After little more than a year he was killed by Zimri ; his armed men and captains were busied at the time in the siege of Gibbethon, a Philistine city: i K. 1>6 8 13^ (r)Aaai/ [B v. 6] Jos. Ant. viii. 124).

6. Father of SHIMEI [3] (i K. 4i8 N^N RV ELA). His name should be restored in 2 S. 23 n in place of the MT reading NSN (see A<;EE), .and possibly also in v. 33 for Shammah. Cp the ingenious discussion in Marq. (Fund. 20 f.).

Assuming that in Ephes-dammim and in the valley of Elah mean the same thing, we have the names Socoh and Azekah (5i) to guide us in de termining the locality, also the implied fact that the valley ran westward. No doubt the valley meant is the \Vady fs-Sanf, one of the landmarks of the country, which begins near Hebron, runs northward as far as Shuweikeh, and thence westward by Gath and Ashdod, to the sea, joining the N. Sukerer. On the positions of the opposed armies, see EPHF.SDAMMIM. Accord ing to W. Miller, 2 who has made a special study of the country, the valley of Elah, or of the terebinth, is the gentle ascent with a watercourse which leads up from a break in the line of heights to Bet Nettif (nearly opposite Shuweikeh, but more eastward). In the valley beneath barley is already ripening. The torrent is nearly dried up (see EPHESDAMMIM), its bed is strewn with smooth white pebbles, and the red sides of the bed are in places so steep that you might call it a valley "within a valley." It is this torrent-bed which the narrator, with perfect know ledge of the country, refers to under the name of the ravine; "the ravine" (N jn), he says, "was between them." The suggestion for the explanation of N<:n is due to Conder (PEFQ, 75, 193). Some of his other identifications are hardly correct (see EPHES-DAMMIM, SHAARAIM, i) ; but he has here thrown great light on the narrative. See also GASm. HG 226 ff.

One advantage in Miller s theory of the valley of Elah (see above) is that it offers a simple explanation of the twofold name of the valley which was the seat of war. A very fine specimen of the butm-tret (terebinth) grows on the slope leading up to Bet Nettlf. It is conceivable that the name of the great valley as a whole was, even in antiquity, valley of the acacias (sant = acacia, or rather mimosa). Wellhausen supposes the Wady es- Sant to be meant by the Valley of Shittim in Joel 3[4]i8. It is a pity that we can hardly explain Q m n D DT DEN as a corrup tion of O BE - See EPHES-DAMMIM. T. K. C.

Geographically, the name describes the great plain E. of the lower Tigris and N. of the Persian Gulf, together with the mountain districts which enclose it on the N. and E. , and to which the Hebrew name Elam and the Assyrian Elamtu 1 (note fem. ending) refer. It is nearly equivalent to the Susiana and Elymais of the Greeks, and the mod. Khuzistan. The native kings of this country called themselves lords of Ansan (or Anzan) ; so late a king as Cyrus still calls himself king of Ansan. This name was originally borne by a city, the conquest of which by Gudea, vice gerent (patesi) of Lagas, between 3500 and 3000 B.C., is recorded in an inscription (KB 3 39); it afterwards designated a district in Elam (see CYKUS, i). Leav ing the geography of this region, which has been fully treated from cuneiform sources by Fried. Delitzsch (Par. 320-329), we pass to the references to Elam in the OT.

The earliest of these is that in Is. 226 (e\a,u.[e]iTcu [BANQ]), where Elam and Kir are mentioned together as entrusted with the duty of blockading Jerusalem. The difficulty in this passage is that the Elamites were never loyal subjects of the Assyrians, and are never mentioned in the inscriptions as serving in an Assyrian army, but often as allies of the Babylonians (Del., Par. 237; Che. Intr. Is. 133; cp Proph. Is. 1132/1 ). Inter polation has been suspected ; but this is not the only admissible theory (see Isaiah, SBOT}. The next certainly dated passage is Ezek. 8224 (eXa/i. [Q]), where Elam and all her multitude are mentioned in a grand description of the inhabitants of ShS5l. The fate of Elam preoccupied more than one of the prophets ; all the kings of Elam are referred to in Jer. 25 25 (om. N*A*) immediately before all the kings of Media, and a special prophecy against Elam is given in Jer. 4934-39 ( v - 3 6 eXa/* [X*]) ; but we cannot with any certainty ascribe these to Jeremiah (see JEREMIAH, BOOK OF). In Is. 21 2 (eXa/^eJcrcu [BANQ], late exilic) Elam is named with Media as the destroyer of Babylon, and a plausible emendation introduces Elam ( go up, O Elam ) into a passage of similar purport in Jer. 50 21 (late). In Dan. 82 (tuXa/i [BAQG Theod.], f\v/j.a.i5i [87]) Shushan is referred to as in Elam, though in Ezra 4 9 (ijXa/xcuoi [BA], aiXa/ztrcu [L]) it is seemingly distinguished from it ; and according to Is. 11 ii (cuXa/ufeJmoi [BA], eXa/a. [KQ], late), Esth. 96i 3 (Shushan) Acts 2p (eXa^emu [Ti. WH]), Jewish exiles resided in Elam in the post-exilic period.

We come lastly to Gen. 1022 [P] (cuXaS [E]), where Elam is mentioned immediately before Asshur as a son of Shem. How is this to be accounted for? Not by the supposition that the Elamites were Semitic (as we now use the word) either in language or in physical type, or that at least a primitive Semitic popu lation was settled in the lower parts of Elam. Not by referring to the early conquest of Babylonia by the Elamites ; this might account for the description of Babylonia as a son of Japheth, but not for the case before us : nor yet by the fact that a Kassite dynasty ruled in Babylonia in 1726-1159 B.C. a reference which would only be in point if P were pre-exilic ; but rather by the undoubted fact that Elam was repeatedly chastised by the Assyrians, and that parts of it were annexed by Sargon (A Z?2y3). P was enough of a historian to know this ; he may indeed have inferred it from Is. 226. The view of De Goeje (Th. T., 70, p. 251) that Elam in Gen. lOza is the Persian Empire is therefore to be rejected. As De Goeje himself remarks, it is strange that, if Elam has this meaning, Media should be a son of Japheth (v. 2). It is true, however, that the prominence of Elam in the Persian empire explains the precedence which it has among the sons of Shem, and the insertion of Lud (i.e. , probably Lydia) after Arphaxad may receive a similar explanation (see LUD, i).

The history of Elam is closely interwoven with that of primitive Babylonia, and subsequently with that of the Assyrian, the Babylonian, and the Persian empires. See ARIOCH, 3; ASUR-BANI-PAL, 6; BABYLONIA, 42^; CHEDORLAOMER, CYRUS, NANEA, PERSIA, SHUSHAN. T. K. c.

The name Elam for a Jewish family or temple-guild is highly improbable. There is abundant evidence that names containing the root-letters ohy were Benjamite. One of these is nD^y (Alemeth) which may have been written cby. If the mark of abbreviation were over looked it would be natural to insert or i after y. Alemeth is identical with Almon, the name of a priestly city in Benjamin (Josh. 21 18 P). Notice also the occurrence of the name in 3 below.

2. b. Shaphan, together with GEM ARI AH (i), was sent by Zede- kiah to Nebuchadrezzar, king of Babylon and bore also at the same time Jeremiah s letter to those in exile there ; Jer. 29 3 [<& 36 3] (eAeao-ai/ [B*H -ap [B am - ], -(rap [A]).

(J"l, cp nN in the Sinaitic Inscr. [Eut. 551]; AlAAG [BAL]; Dt. 28 AiAoJN [BAFL] ; 2 K. 1422-co [B], eAu)9 [A] ; 166 AiAAM [A]), also ELOTH (ni^N, i K. 926 2 K. 166 A |AAM [A]; 2 Ch. 817 262, AlA&M [B]), an important Edomite town, whose connection with Elah the phylarch or clan in Gen. 8641 is fairly obvious. Elath or Eloth (i.e., great trees, perhaps date-palms?) is probably but a later designation of EL-PARAN (see PARAN) i.e., Elath which lies on the desert of Paran. It was situated on the NE. arm of the Red Sea, in the J\a.n\l\c Gulf (which has derived its name from the place itself), and was close to EZION-GEBKR (<j.v. ).

According to Pliny v. 11 12) it was situated 10 m. E. of Petra and 150 m. SE. of Gaza. The region has always been famous for its date-palms (cp Strabo, Iti 776) ; and Mukaddasi Ibn el-Benna (1000 A.D.) in his geography says that Waila (Elath) is the harbour of Palestine and the granary of Higaz rich in palms and fishes (cp ZDPV1 171, and Wetzstein in Del. If oh. u. Koh. 168). Owing to its commanding situation and central position the possession of Elath has in all ages been fiercely contested. According to Hommel (AHT 195), the ancient town and port Mair mentioned upon old Bab. contract-tablets, which gave its name to ships and textile fabrics, is the same as Elath.

Apart from its occurrence under the form EL-PARAN (see PARAN) (Gen. 146), it is mentioned as one of the last stages of the Israelites (Dt. 28 ; see WANDERINGS, 4, ii, 13). It is mentioned also in I K. 926 2 Ch. 817, in order to mark the position of EZION-GEBER (g.v. ). It passed through various vicissitudes. It was repaired by Azariah (2 K. 1422; see UZZIAH, i,), but was at a later time recovered by Edom (2 K. 166 : with Kloster- mann cancel Rezin and read Edom for Aram, and Edomites [kr.] for Aramites [kt.] ; but cp EDOM, 8). Jerome and Eusebius state that Elath (Ailath, cu\a,u) in their time was a place of commercial importance, and the seat of a Roman legion (OSW 8425 21075). It was renowned for its trading with India (Theod. Qucest. in Jerem. 10049; Procop. Bell. Pers. Ii 9 ).

Elath was the residence of a Christian bishop and of a Jewish colony. After suffering at the hands of Saladin it dwindled away. Abulfeda (1300) knows of it only as a place deserted save for a castle which was built to protect the pilgrims who journeyed along by Elath between Cairo and Mecca on the road made by Ahmad ibn-Tulun, who reigned in Egypt in the latter half of the ninth century. 1 It is known now as Akaba ( de clivity ). Little is left of the former gate of Arabia but some heaps of ruins, and the castle, which is still occupied by a few soldiers. 2

(^X JV3 h$, the god of Bethel 1 ), the name given by Jacob to the sacred spot at Luz where he had built an altar (Gen. 35?). @ ADEL , Vg. , Pesh. read simply Bethel ; but this is against Gen. 28ig. Perhaps we should read El-berith ( covenant-God ), or El-berith-Israel, Israel s covenant-God.

("n pX, 28 ; eAA&A [ BAFL ] ; see ELIDAD and cp DOD, NAMES WITH) and Medad (TVD, Sam. Yll, cp MOOAAA [BAFL], whence read "HID, loved one ? 56 ; cp ALMODAD) were two Israelites who prophesied without being locally in contact with Yahw& in the Tent of Meeting (or Revelation) where Yahwe was present in the cloud (Nu. 1 1 26-29). Moses rejoiced at the favour accorded to them, and longed that, not only the guides and directors of Israel, but all Yahwe s people might become prophets. The story (which is related to Ex. 887-11 Nu. 11 16/. 12 1-15 ; see MIRIAM, i) was written by one of the latest members of the Elohistic school, whose aspirations are most nearly paralleled by Jer. 3l3 4 Ezek. llig/. Joel 228/[3i/] (Kue. Hex. 247/1). The names Eldad and Medad (which perhaps do not belong to the original narrative) were probably selected from a store of old traditional names for the sake of assonance (cp Bera, Birsha ; Jabal, Jubal, etc). It is not at all certain that the names are almost identical. See APOCRYPHA, 23.

2 According to Jos. (Ant. viii. 64, lAaveus, ix. 12 i, TjAaOovs, ed. Niese), Elath in former times was called Berenice. The ordinary editions, it will be noticed, refer this remark to Ezion- geber, which is less suitable.

In its present form the prominent feature of the story is that these two men (alone of tne seventy elders) for some unknown reason remained behind, and prophesied without going into the tent. Moses answer shows clearly that the real point is that prophecy is not to be restricted to the few. In v. 26 the words nSriMil IKS N^l D^inDn nani are probably a gloss. 1 A late scribe took exception to the idea that the power of prophecy could be given to anyone outside the seventy elect, and so in serted the gloss with the above effect. The inclusion of Eldad and Medad among those that were written down does not seem, therefore, to belong to the original form of the story.

Probably Elealeh should be restored for the questionable D Sx INta! in Is. 15s. To invent a place-name Erelayim (Perles, Marti) is imprudent. It is quite true, however, that the initial 3 ought to be the preposition.

Elealeh seems to be the modern el- A I ( the lofty ), an isolated hill, with ruins, ^ hr. NNE. of Heshbon. See SPli6-ig; Tristr. Moab, 339 /. ; Bad. 3 > 174.

RV Elasa UA&CA [A], eA- [KV] ; ,l Elesa [It.], Laisa [Vg.]), an unknown locality in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem, where Judas the Maccabee encamped before the encounter which resulted in his defeat and death (i Mace. 9s). Josephus (Ant. xii. 11 1) places Judas s camp in Berzetho (the readings vary : frOu, jiLpfaOw, pap. and (3-r)p.); but this may be in error for the Syrian camp which (i Mace. 94) was at BEREA [i] (Syr. Birath}. A suggested identification is Kh. n asd between the Beth-horons (PEFM 3 115). Reland, however, suggests ADASA (q.v.).

.T applied to persons is a late expression, and the words nSriNrt INS N 1 ?! are omitted in H-P 16, 52, 73, 77 and in the first hand of 131.

2 From Dt. 106 Di. and Dr. infer that JE, as well as P, knows of Aaron as a priest, and of Eleazar as Aaron s successor. Robertson Smith, however, holds (OT/Cf 2 ), 405, n. 2) that Dt 10:66 (the words after Moserah ) is plainly a late and unauthorised gloss ; he refers to v. 8, where the institution of the Levitical priesthood is assigned to a later stage of the wanderings. It is of ELIEZER that the older tradition speaks, as a son, however, not of Aaron, but (together with Gershom) of Moses. In fact, in JE, Moses has the prior claim to the priestly office, and in J Aaron originally is not mentioned at all. In the genealogies of P even, one main branch of the tribe of Levi is still called Gershom, and another important member is called Mushi i.e., the Mosaite (see We. Prot.W i&S; ET i^f.).

i. The third son of Aaron and Elisheba (Ex. 623 [P]) is mentioned often in P, but only twice in JE, according to Driver viz., in Dt. 106 and Josh. 24 33. 2 What we learn of him is to this effect. He discharged priestly functions together with Aaron and his brothers Nadab, Abihu, and Ithamar (Ex. 28i), and after the two elder brothers had died childless Ithamar and he were left to carry on the duties alone (Nu. 84), Eleazar himself becoming the prince of the princes of the Levites and superintending those that had the charge of looking after the sanctuary (Nu. 832 ; cp 1637^! [17 2 ^] 19 3 /). His special duty with respect to the things necessary for the sanctuary and its service is de tailed in Nu. 4 16. Shortly before Aaron s death he was invested on Mt. Hor with his father s garments of authority (Nu. Wtisff. ; cp Dt. 106 [D]). He now appears as Moses coadjutor, taking the place of Aaron ; together they took the census of the people (Nu. 2663), and divided the spoil of the Midianites (Nu. 31 12^). It was to them that the daughters of Zelophehad came to sue for an inheritance (Nu. 27 1^), and the b ne Reuben and b ne Gad for a pasture-land for their flocks (Nu. 32 2 /~.). 1 The charge was given to Joshua in the presence of Eleazar, who was to inquire for him by the judgment of Urim before Yahwe (Nu. 27 & / ) ; just as his son Phinehas is said to have done, previous to the assault on Gibeah (Judg. 2028). 2 Henceforth in the accounts of the dividing of the land etc. Eleazar is mentioned before Joshua (Nu. 8228 34 17 Josh. 14 1 1?4 19si 21 1). 3 At his death he was buried at Gibeah of Phinehas (Josh. 24 33 [E]), which had been given to his son in Mt. Ephraim. He married one of the daughters of Putiel (Ex. 625), and the priesthood is said to have remained in his family till the time of Eli, and again from Zadok till the time of the Maccabees state ments which need a strictly critical examination. See ZADOK, i. s. A. c.

2. Son of Abinadab, temp. Samuel. According to a comparatively late story the ark was deposited for twenty years in the house of Abinadab at Kirjath-jearim under the guardianship of his son Eleazar (i S. 1 if.}. Eleazar in this idealisation of history is intended as a contrast to that other son of Abinadab (Uzza) who proved wanting in the reverence essential to a minister of the ark (2 S. 636). His name is probably meant to suggest this contrast. Observe that Eleazar was specially sanctified for his functions. See ARK, 5.

T. K. c.

3. b. Dodo the Ahohite (i Ch. 11 12), or b. Dodai b. Ahohi (2 S. 23g ; but see AHOHITE [2]), one of David's three heroes. His great exploit (which was in the valley of Rephaim : see PAS-UAMMIM) is recorded in 2 S. 23g/. (@ 1! , however, has e\eai>av) and i Ch. 11 13/1 In both passages the text has to be emended ; but there is much difference among critics (cp Klo. , Marq. Fund. 16, and H. P. Smith). The name of Eleazar does not appear in i Ch. 27 4, though we expect to find him, not Dodai, in high command in David s army. Compare, however, DODAI, and note that an Eliezer b. Dodavahu occurs in 2Ch.2(>37. See ELIEZER (3).

4. A Merarite : i Ch. 232i/ (cXtafap v. 21 [A]) 2428.

5. i Esd. 8 43 = Ezra 8 16, ELIEZEK [10].

6. In Ezra 8 33 an Eleazar, son of Phinehas, is mentioned as superintending the weighing out of gold and silver in the temple: i Esd. 863 and (om. BN*A, but eAec^ap N c - am ff- L) Neh. l-2 4 2.

8. An Israelite (i.e., a layman), son of Parosh : Ezra 1625 i Esd. 926.

9. The fourth son of Mattathias (i Mace. 2 5), who bore the surname Avaran (cp AuRANUs). 4 According to 2 Mace. 823^." his brother Judas appointed him to read aloud the sacred book, and with a variation of his own name as watchword ( the Help of God ) he led the first band of the army against Nicanor and completely defeated him; in 2 Mace. 1815 this is credited to Judas himself. In the fight near Beth-zacharias against Antiochus Eupator(i63 u.c.) Eleazar nobly sacrificed his life (see 1 Macc. 643).

10. A learned scribe, who at the age of ninety years suffered torture and martyrdom at the hands of Antiochus Epiphanes, 2 Macc. 618-31 (eAeafopo? [VA]). He was designated by the early Christian fathers proto-martyr of the old covenant, foundation of martyrdom (Chrys. Horn. 3 in Mace, et al.). The narrative in 3 Mace. (5 has apparently borrowed the name Eleazar from this scribe. See APOCALYPTIC, 66.

11. Father of JASON (<?.i>., 3), i Mace. 817.

12. Sirach Eleazar, father of Jesus (Ecclus. 6027) ; see

ECCLF.SIASTICUS, 2.

13. b. Eliud, placed three generations above Joseph (Mt. 1 15).

S. A. C. , I, 3fr ; T. K. C. , 2.

1 32 1-17 is of composite origin. How much belongs to P (more precisely Po) is disputed ; but the mention of Eleazar the priest beyond question comes from this source (see Dr., Intr. 64; Holzinger, flint., Tabellen, 10).

(S?^ <i n t ?N ^S, God, the God of Israel ), the name given by Jacob to the altar which he had built at Shechem (Gen. 33 20). Perhaps we should read God of the tents ( <l ?nN) of Israel ; his tent (iVnx) [Ehole] precedes in v. 19. T. K. C.

This fundamental meaning gives the key to the exceedingly interesting history of the word from its use in Plato down to Modern Greek. All the special senses in which it is employed, whether usual or occasional 1 some of them very remarkable can be carried back to this, though between the meanings one of a row and demon is a long way. It conduces to clearness if we keep in mind its three special concrete applications.

(a) It denotes a letter, as one of the series of letters constituting a word or even a syllable i.e. , not a written sign (ypa-n^a.} but a speech-sound (Plato, Deff. 414 E : CTOixeToj <f>wvfjs <f>uvji dcriVfleros : similarly Arist. Poet. 20). Thus, for example, the letter p is rd pcD rb ffTotxe tov (Plat. Crat. 426 D), the alphabet is T& <rroixe?a, and alphabetical is /card (TTOIX^OV.

This concrete meaning explains the metonymy by which the plural is so frequently used to denote the beginnings, rudiments, or elements of a science or art the ABC as we say ; cp the by-name Abecedarians given to a group of Anabaptists at the Reformation, and see the Oxford Engl. Diet., s.r. It is enough to recall the title of Euclid s work (oroixeta) on the Elements of Geometry. Many other examples are to be found in the Lexicons.

In this sense the word is met with only once in the Bible, ye have need again that some one teach you the rudiments of the first principles of the oracles of God (ret (TToixela. TTJS apxfy r ^ v ^oyiwv rov 0eoC), Heb. 5 12, where the words T?}S dpxys intensify the idea, the be ginnings of the elements. 2

(6) Shadow of the sundial (e.g., Aristoph. Eccl. 652 : orav 77 deicd-irovv rb ffToi-xelov, when the shadow measures ten feet ). The shadow is here doubtless thought of as a line which hour by hour grows longer or shorter and by degrees marks the progress of the day. SiTotxeiov, properly speaking, is a fraction of this line, and then by synecdoche becomes the line itself. This meaning is not met with in the Bible.

(c) Groundstuff , element, as constituent part of an organism. In this sense it was not used (so ancient tradition has it) before Plato ; but from his time onward it became a current meaning. The early philosophers assumed sometimes one, sometimes more than one, primary constituent element of the universe. Em- pedocles reckoned four fire, water, earth, and air. Many citations from non-biblical writers will be found in the Lexicons ; and Philo and Josephus also use the word in this sense. In the Greek Bible the following examples occur : Wisd. 7 17, For he himself gave me an unerring knowledge of the things that are ; to know the constitution of the world and the operation of the elements (avcr-aaiv /crfcr/iou Kal Ivepyeiav aroi xtlwv} , 19 18, the elements changing their order one with another (Si favrCiv yap TCL aroi^la. ne6apfj.o&fj.fva) ; 4 Mace. 12 13 [the tongues of men] of like passions with yourself, and composed of the same elements (roi>j opoioTraOe is Kal fK T&V avrCiv yeyovAras aTOi\eluv ; cp 2 Mace. 7 22, the first elements [ffroixeiuffiv] of each one of you ); and, according to most exegetes, 2 Pet. 3 10, the day of the Lord will come as a thief ; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise (0Toix a ^ Kawovneva XvOr/fferai [AKL, etc., \vd-qffovTai\), and the earth and the works that are therein shall be burned up ; also v. 12, the day of God by reason of which the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat (5i* T)P oupavol Trvpov/Mevoi \v8r)<rovTat Kal ffTOfXfla. Ka.vffovneva. T-f]Kfrai). The rendering elements here gives an excellent sense, and it would be mere pedantry to ask why the elements are named along with the heavens and the earth ; the writer s purpose is to depict the last day in the boldest colours, and he seeks to heighten the effect of his picture by bringing in the ffroLxeia. At the same time the inter pretation which takes the word here to refer to demonic life-spirits (see below, 2) is entitled to attention. Though the sense of rudiments or beginnings, alluded to above, is hardly to be traced to this last concrete application of the word, the very usual metonymic sense of fundamental condition, thesis, principle, rule of which there is no example in the Bible is doubt less to be taken from this meaning. On the other hand, the biblical passages receive much light from another part of the history of the word : the concrete sense in which in late Greek the word ffTOixfta is specialised to mean the planets (as being the elements and so to say supports of the heavens) 1 and, more widely, the stars. 2

Now every element has its god ; 3 so also every star. In the Orphic Hymns the personified ether is called the noblest element, orotxeio^ apiffrov (64), Hephaestus is called the perfect element, ffroixelov afie^es (604), in the great Paris magic- papyrus v. 1303 the moon- goddess is the immortal element, ffToixtiov &&lt;f>6apTov, and in the so-called nymph of the world, the K6pr) K0(r/j.ov of Hermes Trismegistus (ap. Stob. Eel. i. 385 12^! ), the aroi.\f.l.o. come as gods before the supreme God, and make their complaint of the arrogance of men. 4 Conceptions such as these perhaps owe their origin to eastern influences ; but at any rate they have their analogues in the Jewish idea that all things as, for example, fire, wind, clouds, stars -have their proper angels or spirits, 5 a thought which is operative in primitive Christian literature also ; see Rev. 7 1 (four angels standing at the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth), 14 18 (another angel . . . which hath power over fire), 16s (the angel of the waters ; cp Jn. 64), 19 17 (an angel standing in the sun). It is from these notions probably that we ought to explain the peculiar meaning of ffroixeiov, in which it stands, by synecdoche, for divine being, spirit, demon, genius. At what period this use first arose is obscure ; but doubtless it is comparatively old. Our main ex amples l are found in the Testamentum Salomonis (see APOCRYPHA, 14), which in its present form bears evidence of Christian editing, and by K. A. Bornemann is attributed to the time of Lactantius. 2

1 Dieterich, 61. The present writer regards as much less probable the conjecture (see Pape s WorterbucK) that the planets are so called as having a controlling influence upon the affairs of men.

2 It is further applied to the signs of the zodiac, and even to the entire heaven with its system of stars ; the metonymic signi fication, great stars = great men, also occurs.

Seven female spirits (n-i/ru/iara) come to Solomon, and, questioned, reply : We are some of the thirty-three genii of the ruler of the underworld . . . and our stars are in heaven . . . and we are invoked as goddesses (WKI? e<rfiei> fK riav rpiaxov-a Tpiiav <rrOL\eiiav rov KOiTfj.oKpdropO ; rov CTKOTOVS . . . <cai ra iarpa yfiiav iv ovpai/to et<rix . . . Kal uis Seal KaAovficda ; Fleck, 3 I2o_/). Afterwa rds come six and thirty spirits (n-i/ev/naTa) to Solomon, and, questioned, make answer : We are the thirty- six genii, the rulers of this underworld, . . . since the Lord God has given thee power over every spirit, in the air, upon the earth and below the earth, therefore we also like the rest of the spirits stand before thee (i^ieis fa-fiev ra rpiaKovra iff (TTO<.\(ia oi KO<Tfj.oKpaTopfi; rov GKOrovs TOUTOU . . . iirei&r) Kvpios o $eby UStaKC <rot TTJV fovo~iav firl iravros irvfVfj.aro ; acpiov re Kal iiriyfiov Kal Kara\9oviov, Sia rovro Kal I7fift irapitrra.fj.eda. ivuiniov <rov o ra XotTra irveyfiara). The first calls himself the first decan of the zodiac circle (rrpuiTos &fKavo<; rov <a5iaKOv KVK\OV , Fleck, I29/.). Plainly stoicheion here is absolutely synonymous with god and spirit, and we are here dealing, in part, with star-gods. Further, the usage of writers of the Byzantine period has to be noticed. Sophocles (Greek Lexicon of the Roman .and Byzantine periods, memorial edition, 1888, p. 1012) gives under trrot\dov genius, the spirit guarding a particular place or person, also talisman, Theoph. Cont. 379 14, Leo Gram. 287, Anon. Byz. 1209 C. Cp the same Lexicon also, s.w. aroixeioAaTpijs, <rroi.xti.6ia ( to perform talismanic operations upon anything ), <rroix.o>p.ariK6<; ( talismanic ), 0Tocx wo-t? ( the performing of talismanic opera tions upon anything ), and o~roi\ei<i)TiK6$ ( talismanic ). Most instructive of all, however, is the usage of modern popular Greek. The ordinary name by which the local tutelary spirits are designated in modern Greece is (rroi^fio (TO) i.e., o-roixfiov, element. 4 Skarlatos, AefiKOK . . ., gives the meaning <c<rroi- KiSia Saifioi La f/ fyavratrfiara {it.). All sorts of trroixtia occur ; the oToixeio of the threshing-floor, the rock, the river, the bridge, and so on (ib. 187-9); <rroi\tuaii.evos may mean one under the protection of a oroi^eio (it. 196). This employment of the word for tutelary spirit is a specialisation of the more general meaning of spirit, and speaks for the relative antiquity of the latter use ; in the ideas and vocabulary of the common people, as Jacob Grimm among others has shown, the conception of a remote antiquity will often be found to survive.

Here then is the historical line of progression from the original meaning of the word to that of tutelary spirit : member of a series, element, elemental deity, deity (demon, spirit), tutelary deity.

In Gal. 4:39, where Paul says : ... so we also, when we were children, were held in bondage under the elements of the world (uirb ra ffTot\eta rou r.ni 9a? K6ff/j.ov), and in v. 9, where he says, But now that ye have come to know God, . . . how turn ye back again to the weak and beggarly elements (tiri TO, dcrOfvij Kal a) whereunto ye desire to be in bondage roixeia is taken by most interpreters as meaning rudiments (so RV) in the sense indicated above (i a) ; Paul is supposed to mean the crude first beginnings of religion in those who belong to the /c6o>tos. Others, however, start from the meaning given in i c and take Paul to be speaking of the elements of the world, world being here taken in its well-known ethical sense ; kosmos is the central idea ; under the elements of the world (virb ra. ffroixeia TOV is merely an amplification for 'under the world' rbv icb<r/j.ov).

1 Dieterich (Atra.ras, 61) holds that in Wisd. 7 17 (see above) demon is a possible rendering as well as element ; this, how ever, is not probable, the jri/tv/tara (not winds but spirits ) being named in v. 20.

2 Ztschr. fur die hist. Thcol., 1844, Hft. 3, 15. An edition and discussion of this hitherto much-neglected writing would be very welcome and, in view of recent discoveries in the field of oriental Greek magic, most opportune.

This last interpretation is certainly open to the objection that in v. g only o-roixeta are mentioned, whereas if Ko<7/iios had been the main idea, we should have expected the shortened phrase to run VTTO TOV . . . Ko<rfj.ov and not virb TO. . . . oroixeia. The first interpretation also, however, is not free from difficulty. In v. 3 it is the law, in one sense or another, that is being spoken of: this is shown by the context (cp especially v. 5 : vn-o vo/j.ov) ; but in : . 9 the topic is the gods of the Gentile Galatians. It is not easy to understand how Paul can here be speaking of the law as rudiments after he had so shortly before been referring to it (3 24) as a tutor (iraiSayiayos) and likening it (4 2) to guardians and stewards (en-tYpon-cu and <H<COI>O/OUH) ; nor is it easy to see how he can say of rudiments that they are aaSevij (cat 7TTa>x<* ; a weak and beggarly ABC is not a very happy phrase. Further, the whole context in both places points less to conceptions of material objects than to personal beings ; see especially v. 9.

In view of these difficulties, there is much to be said for the interpretation which takes the word in the other sense (see if, end) of spirit, demon. Paul, in this view, is speaking of cosmic spiritual beings, and by them he understands, in v. 3 the angels by whom, according to 3 19, the law was ordained, and in v. g the heathen deities whom the Galatians had formerly served. Jewish bondage to the law, as being bondage to angels, and Gentile service of strange gods as being bondage to demons, are alike slavery to the powers of the world (die kosmischen Machte). This interpretation, the essence of which consists in taking <rroixoa as meaning personal powers (personliche Machte) has been upheld with a large variety of modifications by Hilgenfeld, 1 A. Ritschl, 2 Holsten, 3 Klopper, 4 Spitta, 5 Everting, 6 A. Dieterich," whose allusion to all the modern theological commentators seems hardly called for.

It may fairly be conjectured that the phrase the elements of the world (oroide la. TOV KOCT-JU.OU) is a technical expression which does not owe its origin to Paul. That it was a current .one seems to be indicated also by the turn of phrase in the Tesfamenfum Salowzonis 'the elements, the rulers' (rk urorxeia KOO>iOKpaTOpos.) , or 'the elements of the ruler' (71 w~o~pia 708 KOO>iOKpaTOpos.

In Col. 2820, also, this last interpretation seems preferable to the rendering elements of the world or rudiments of the world. The context is in both places similar to that in Gal. 43. By the (rrotxe?a rov K6fffj.ov, which he brings into sharp contrast with Christ, Paul intends in one sense or another the law ; but he. mentions, instead of the law, the personal cosmic powers standing behind the law, the angels ; whom indeed, he goes on expressly to name in Col. 2 15 as the princi palities and the powers (rds apx&s /cat rds f fowri as). We thus obtain a surprising light upon the much- disputed passage in Col. 2i8, where mention is made of a worship of angels (0pr/ffKfla rCiv dyyt\ui>) : by the angel service of the Colossians he means their law service (cp Gal. 819) ; all the learned discussions about one particular kind of angel worship or another now become superfluous.

That in 2 Pet. 3 10 12 the rendering elements is an adequate one has already been shown ( i c). Yet it is not impossible that personal powers might be meant here also, as Spitta 8 and Ktihl 9 suppose. The main objection that the expressions dissolve and melt (\v0ri<reraL, Tr/Kerui) could hardly be used of personal spirits is well met by Spitta, by a reference to the Test. xii. Pair. , Levi, 4 (ed. Sinker, 140), where, in a similar way, in the description of the judgment day, it is said the whole creation being agitated and the invisible spirits melting (xal irda-r/f Kricrews K\ovovf^vi)s Kal rCov dopdruv Trvevfjidruv TTIKO^VUV}.

Before identifying, it would have been well to examine the text. The two names before Jebus in < B are /cat ffe\rjKa.v (cat dapetjXa i.e. nSsnm y^ ; KO.V is a duplication of /cat ; <re\ri corresponds to jj^. Zela and Taralah therefore answer in " to Zelah and Ha-eleph in MT. Ha-eleph (which is an impossible name) must be a corruption of Tar alah or rather (see TARALAH) of Irpeel (Wv) ; p,S comes straight from 7NS. T. K. C.

It is an elephant of the Indian species that appears on the Black Obelisk (see below) ; but the African elephant also was no doubt known.

The two species, Elcfihas indicus (tnaximus ) and E. afri- canns, together with such fossil forms as the Mammoth (name probably from Behemoth),! the Mastodon, and others, consti tute the Mammalian order Proboscidea. The Indian elephant is now found, in a state of nature, in India, Burmah, the Malay Peninsula, Assam, Cochin China, Ceylon, and Sumatra, frequent ing the wooded districts ; its African congener lives throughout Africa south of the Sahara desert, but is retreating before the approach of civilised man. In Pleistocene times it spread as far north as Europe.

The Indian species has been domesticated since pre historic times and is still largely used in the service of man. The male alone as a rule has tusks. The African elephant is, in the male, larger than the Indian, the ear-flaps and the eyes are larger and the forehead more convex, there are two finger-like processes on the trunk instead of one, and the pattern on the teeth is different ; both sexes have tusks. In temper this species is usually fiercer and the animal is undoubtedly more powerful and active than its Indian relative.

It is certain that elephants were known to the old inhabitants of Egypt and Assyria, by whom they were sometimes hunted for the sake of their ivory and their hides (KB 1 39 , Tiglath-pileser I. ; As. it. Eur. 263, Thotmes III. ; Houghton, TSBA 8 123^ ). There is an elephant among theanimals figured on the Black Obelisk 2 of Shalmaneser II. (858-824). Of course there may have been more than one elephant in the tribute from the land of Musri ; but one was enough for the purpose of representation.

1 The 6 may have become tn through Slavonic influence. 2 The term used for elephant in Shalm. Obel. Epigr. III. is baziati. The word al-af> also occurs, but in the sense of ox not elephant (Wi. KB 1 151). Houghton suggests the wild buffalo. Cp IVORY.

Elephants in warfare first appear among the Persians. Darius at Arbela (331 B.C.) employed 15 of them. They were often used by the Seleucids, frequent mention of them being made in the Maccabean wars (cp i Mace. 834 630 86 Ils6 2 Mace. 11 4 1815 etc.). These elephants, some of which carried towers (i Mace. 637/1 ), were almost certainly of the Indian species. Special mention is made of the Indian driver (6 Ivd&s, i Mace. ib. ). The war elephants were placed under the care of a special officer (2 Mace. 14i2). In classical times the African species was tamed by the Egyptians and took part both in the Carthaginian wars and in the Roman shows. Since in recent times the natives of Africa have not shown sufficient ability to tame this somewhat restive animal it has been suggested that the Carthaginians imported their animals from the East ; J but there is little reason to doubt that the true E. africanus was employed in the Punic wars and even accompanied Hannibal s army across the Alps. The presence of African elephants in modern menageries proves that this species is capable of domestication and education in the hands of competent trainers. The elephant rarely breeds in captivity. A. E. s. S. A. C.

(eAeYOeporrpAic, free city. with play on double meaning of DHH, Horites and free men ? cp Ber. rabba, 42), the name bestowed about about AD 200 by the emperor Septimius Severus on Betogabra, now Beit Jibrin, an important place in Judaea, mentioned already (see BEN-HESED, 2).

How central it was appears from the fact that Eusebius in the Onom. often reckons the distances of other towns with reference to it. It was in fact the capital of a large province during the fourth and the fifth cen turies of our era. It was also an episcopal city of Palestitia Prima (Notifies Ecclesiastics, 6). In the Talmudic period it had a large Jewish population, and produced some eminent Rabbins.

The Talmudic name is Beth-gubrin (Neub. Geog. 122^). The Doctrine of Acldai (yd cent. A.D.) expressly refers to Eleutheropolis as called Betgubrin in the Aramaic tongue (Nestle, I Efr Q, 79, p. 138 ; see ELKOSHITE, 3). The name Betogabra OaiVoya./3pa) is given to it by Ptolemy (v. 16 6). It also appears in the Peutinger Tables as Betogubri, and we can hardly be wrong in correcting, in Niese s text of Jos. BJ iv. 8 i, UijrajSpip into Br)Taya/3pti . Whether the name alludes to pre historic giants, is beyond our knowledge.

For some centuries the Grnjco- Roman name sup planted the older designation ; but when, 150 years after the Saracenic conquest, the city was destroyed, the latter revived (Reland, Pal. 222, 227 ; Gesta Dei per Francos, 1044).

On this site, which they called Gibelin (a corruption of Ar. tBeth-]gebrim), the Crusaders in the twelfth century built a castle. After the battle of Hattln (1187 A.D.), it fell for a time into the hands of Saladin. Retaken by Richard of England, it was finally captured by Bibars, and remained in possession of the Saracens until its destruction in the sixteenth century ; ruins of it still remain (see Porter, Syria and Pal., 256^).

The site of Eleutheropolis, in spite of the minute definitions of early writers, passed so completely out of mind that Robinson had to discover it. All the early statements point to Beit Jibrin, which is now a large village, N. of Merash, situated in a little nook or glen in the side of a long green valley. Near it begin the famous caverns, to the excavation of which the limestone of the adjoining ridges was very favourable. We may not follow the Midrash which ascribes their origin to the HORITES [</.v.] ; but the antiquity of their use can hardly be doubted.

Jerome already noticed their wide extent (Comm. in Obad. 1), in which indeed they rival the catacombs of Rome and Malta. They have been explored by Robin son, and more fully by Porter, who compares them to subterranean villages.

Eleutheropolis, or Beth-gubrin, stands in close histori cal connection with MARESHAH (q.v. }. G. A. Smith has put this in a very forcible way (HG 233). If from the first to the sixteenth centuries Beit Jibrin ( = Eleu theropolis) has been prominent, and Mareshah forgotten, we may infer that the population moved under com pulsion from the one site to the other. On the caves spoken of above, besides Robinson and Porter, compare Lucien Gautier (Souvenir de la Terre-Salnte, 63-67). He is of opinion that such caves have been in use for different purposes at many periods. Elsewhere a refer ence to them has been traced in a corrupt name in i K. 4 10, in the original text of which Mareshah may have been designated Beth-Horim (see BEN-HESED, 2).

T. K. c.

1 At all events there seems a close resemblance between nagt and n&ga, the Ethiopic and Indian words respectively for elephant (Meyer, CA 1 226).

(i) The slayer of Goliath; one of David s warriors (ben-Jair). The MT of 2 S. 21 19 reads (RV), And there was again war with the Philistines at Gob ; and Elhanan the son of Jair the Bethlehemite slew Goliath the Gittite, the staff of whose spear was like a weaver s beam. The document to which the passage belongs (2 S. 21 15-22, and 288-39) is an extract from an ancient Israelite roll of honour, and deserves more credit than the later story which ascribes the slaying of Goliath to the youthful David.

It is scarcely necessary to criticise the theory of Sayce (Mod. Rev. 5 169^.), which is a development of Boucher s, that David and Elhanan are the same person (cp Solomon Jedidiah). This is in fact precritical in its origin. The Targ. on 2 S. 21 19 states that Elhanan was David the son of Jesse, who wove the curtains (cp Jaare-oregim) of the sanctuary ; cp also the Targ. on i Ch. 205(EAA<xi-[B]).

We have next to remark that definite information as to the time when Elhanan slew Goliath is wanting ; in fact the meagreness of tradition as to the details of the Philistine war has excited a very natural surprise (see DAVID, 7). All that is certain is that David was no longer in the prime of life, for an exploit similar to that of Elhanan was performed by the king s nephew Jonathan (2 S. 2l2i), and in another episode of the same struggle David s warriors vowed that he should no longer en counter the risk of a single combat (v. 17).

The place where Elhanan fought is mentioned ; but the reading is uncertain. MT says that it was at GOB (q.v.) , but the first of the three combats related (v. 18) was possibly, and the third certainly (v. 20), at Gath. We may feel sure that Gob in v. 19 is a false reading.

The name of Elhanan s /ather also is slightly un certain. In 2 S. 2824 i Ch. 1126 we read of Elhanan ben-Dodo, of Bethlehem. It is true, this Elhanan is sometimes (e.g. in BDB ; but not in SS) distinguished from the slayer of Goliath ; but the grounds do not seem to be conclusive. DODO is certainly a personal, JAIR (q.v. , ii. ) may be a clan-name. It is tempting to suppose that the circumstance that, according to one tradition, Elhanan s father bore the name DODO (i. ), facilitated the transference of Elhanan s exploit to the youthful David.

The description of three out of the four single combats related in 2 S. 21 15-22 recurs in nearly the same form in i Ch. 204-8. It is to this version (see v.5) that we are indebted for a correction of the impossible name Jaare-oregim in 2 S. 21 19 ; the name should undoubtedly be read Jair (i.e. not nj? but vjr). The surprising appendage oregim (i.e. weavers ) is an accidental repetition of the closing word of the verse. The statement of Chronicles that Elhanan slew Lahmi the brother of Goliath need give us no trouble. The words TIN DfiS (Lahmi the brother of) have been intro duced by the Chronicler to harmonise this passage with the story of David and Goliath. l At the same time the Chronicler omitted the statement that Elhanan was a Bethlehemite (betk-hallafimi). Naturally enough ; for from the latter part of this designation he obtained the name which he affixed to Elhanan s giant. He would not however deny that the giant had some connection with Goliath and so he (or his authority) made Lahmi Goliath s brother. All this is to be regarded not as conscious depravation of the text, but as a supposed restoration of what must have been the historical fact. The only way to avoid this conclusion would be to assume that Lahmi was derived from the names of the gods Lahamu, Luhmu, mentioned at the beginning of the Babylonian epic of creation (Jensen, Kosmologle, 268, 274 ; cp RPV\ 1133), already brought into con nection (not unplausibly) 1 with the name Bethlehem by Tomkins (PEFQ, 1885, p. 112). For other discussions of this subject see Ewald, Hist. 870 ; Stade, Gesch. 1228; Kohler, Bibl. Gesch. ii. 1294; Che. Aids to Criticism, 10 8 1 125. Compare Driver, TBS, 272 ; Budde and Kittel in SBOT. See also GOLIATH.

2. One of David s thirty heroes ; mentioned second on the list (ben Dodo); 2 S. 2824 i Ch. 11 26. Perhaps the same as no. i above. It is very improbable that David had two warriors of equal rank, both named Elhanan, and both Bethlehemites. Compare the case of SIBBECHAI (the slayer of Saph), also given in the list of the thirty ; cp Jos. Ant. vii. 122. T. K. C.

Priest of Yahwe at the temple of Shiloh, the sanctuary of the ark, and at the same time judge over Israel an unusual combination of offices, which must have been won by signal services to the nation in his earlier years, though in the account preserved to us he appears in the weakness of extreme old age, unable to control the petulance and rapacity of his sons, Hophni and Phinehas (i S. 1-4 143 i K. 227). While the central authority was thus weakened, the Philistines advanced against Israel, and gained a complete victory in the great battle of EBENEZER \_q.v. , i], where the ark was taken, and Hophni and Phinehas slain. On hearing the news Eli fell from his seat and died. According to MT he was ninety-eight years old, and had judged Israel for forty years (i S. 4 1518). gives but twenty years in v. 18, and seems not to have read v. 15, which is either a gloss or the addition of a redactor (cp SBOT, ad loc. ).

After these events the sanctuary of Shiloh appears to have been destroyed by the Philistines (cp Jer. 7, and see SHILOH), and the descendants of Eli with the whole of their clan or father s house subsequently appear as settled at NOB (i S. 21 1 [2], 22 uff., cp 14s). The massacre of the clan by Saul, with the subsequent de position of the survivor Abiathar from the priestly office ( i K. 2 27), is referred to in a prophetic passage of deuter- onomistic origin, such as might (the narrator thought) have been uttered in the days of Eli ( i S. 227 ff. 3 1 1 ff. ; see Bu. SBOT).

1 The place-names of Palestine must in many cases have an origin very different from what the later inhabitants supposed, and a primitive divine name, famous in Babylonian mythology, is likely to have found a record in Palestine.

Now Zadok (from whom the later high priests claimed descent), who appears in i Ch. 612 [638] as the lineal descendant of Aaron through Eleazar and Phinehas, was not of the house of Eli (lK-227 . 35) . and in lCh 24 Ahimelech, son of Abiathar, is reckoned to the sons of Ithamar, the younger branch of the house of Aaron. Hence the traditional view that in the person of Eli the high-priesthood was temporarily diverted from the line of Eleazar and Phinehas into that of Ithamar (cp Jos. Ant. v. Us viii. 13, and for the fancies of the Rabbins on the cause of this diversion, Selden, De Succ. in Pontif., lib. i. cap. 2). This view, however, is at direct variance with the passage in i S. 2 which represents Eli's father's house or clan as the original priestly family, and predicts the destruction or degradation to an inferior position of the whole of this father s house, not merely the direct descendants of Eli. Ahimelech, moreover, who is the only link to connect Eli with Ithamar, is an ambiguous personage, whose name has arisen from a textual corruption (see ABIATHAR, end), and it is evident that the priestly genealogy in i Ch. 5 f. merely en deavours to show that the sons of Zadok derived their origin in an unbroken line of descent from Aaron. The book of Chronicles wholly ignores the priesthood of Eli. [So much at any rate is indisputable that in the pre-regal period the family of Eli discharged priestly functions at the sanctuary of Shiloh. That it had a levitical connection is implied in the name of Phinehas borne by one of Eli s sons (HOPHNI is only a variation of this), and also in i S. 227-36. Eli s sons, however, do not appear to have entered into the original tradition ; they are only introduced in the interests of later theory. That Eli belonged to the family of Moses is at any rate not impossible. The explanation of HOPHNI as an outgrowth of PHINEHAS leads to the suggestion that for ^y, Eli, we should perhaps read TJlPVjIi 'Eliezer' = iryVx, Eleazar. Eleazar and Eliezer are both Levite names, though the former is the ordinary name of the father of Phinehas. ]

See further LEVITES, PRIEST, ZADOK, zff. As HELI (i) Eli comes into the genealogy of Ezra (2 Esd. 1 1).

As to the word for my God, in both Mt. and Mk. WH give eAcoi,; Treg. prefers rjAi, in Mt., eAun in Mk. ; Ti. and Zahn prefer rjAei in Mt., eAon in Mk. For the verb all agree in adopt ing a-apaxOavfi. (Zahn -vi, an unimportant variation).

Epiphanius (Haer. 6968) remarks on Mt. 2746 that the words 17X1 7/Xi were spoken by Jesus in Hebrew, the rest of the passage in Syrian.

Lagarde, too (GGA, 82, 329), referred to this passage as proving the systematic correction to which even our oldest MSS had been subjected. Certainly eAwi (or, more completely Aramaic, eAai. , or aAai ) is what we should have expected ; but in citing a passage like this it was not unnatural to use the well- known Hebrew term 7K el.

Dalman, who holds this word from the cross to be historical, thinks that Jesus most probably used the Hebrew form ( elt), just because it is a little less obvious. The variation a<0ai 3 ; n D Lat. both in Mt. and in Mk. is very singular. o-a/Sax&n/ei is good Aramaic = 3Ep3C>. a$0a.i/ec, or rather a.a<j>6avei, is a Hebrew substitute for the Aramaic verb, due to one who wished to make the whole passage a quotation from the Hebrew. The original reading aa<j>8a.vfi. was presumably altered into (Ja^Oarei = ^risyi (rendered uivei$ia-<i<; fie in cod. D., Mk. 1634) by scribes who only under stood Syriac. See Chase, Syro-Lat. Text of the Gospels, 107, JTh.S 1 278, and E*p. T 11 3347: T . K. C.

3. Son of Jesse and brother of David. According to i S. 166 i Ch. 2 13 he was the eldest son of Jesse (cp 171328). In i Ch. 27 18 mention is made of a certain ELIHU (q.v. , 2) as one of the brethren of David (this name is inserted by Pesh. in i Ch. 2 13 and occupies the seventh place, David being eighth). Elihu, however, is undoubtedly a variant for Eliab ; so @ BAL and Jer. Quasi., ad loc. His daughter ABIHAIL (q.v. , 4) is mentioned in 2 Ch. 11 18 (EXiav [B]), where, however, Eliab b. Jesse may be incorrect (see ITHREAM, MICHAL).

4. b. Nahath, a Kohathite, a descendant of Korah (i Ch.ii 27 [12] BAL). In v. 34 [19] the name appears as ELIEL (q.v., 5), and in i S. 1 i as Ei.mu (q.v., 2).

1 In all the Aramaic inscriptions only two examples of this form occur, viz. jnvrta a d jrvnSi?3> both Palmyrene.

2 For these forms cp Marq. Fund. 20, who shows that the initial <r is, in each case, due to the following <raAo/3a> t, and that the \L is a corruption from Ao (M=AA); thus e/j.acroi , 0-afj.a.^a, etc., stand for eAao/3ou ( = inbN)i aAaajSa, etg.

(Tvh$. 28 ; AA&A [BAFL]), a Ben jamite prince, Nu. 342i,f P). The name seems traditional (cp ELDAU) ; its meaning is disputed. Some connect it, like BILDAU and BEDAD, with the divine name Dad ( Ramman) ; thus it would mean Dad is (the clan s) god : the name Dad-ilu is borne by a king of the land of Kaska (Schr. COT 1 244 /. ; Del. Par. 298). However, Elidad may also mean God has loved ; cp Sab. htrrn. D. H. Miiller, ZDAfG, 1883. p. 15 ; and see NAMES, 28. Incidentally this avoids the apparent incongruity of giving a heathen name to an Israelite ; but heathen names such as Elidad, Hur, Ash-hur, Ash-bel (?), may have been borne by men who knew nothing of the heathen gods whose names entered into their own, or who at any rate did not worship them (cp MoRDECAl, i). Gray s explanation (HPN, 61) a kinsman (uncle) is God seems less probable ; see DOD [NAMES WITH]. T. K. C.

(?KvK, eX[e]iijX [BAL]) ; a man s name somewhat frequent in Chronicles, but not found else where in the OT. It means My God is El, 38 ; or, perhaps, El is God. In i Ch. 634 [19] Eliel is sub stituted for Elihu ( = He [Yahwe] is God 1 ). Both names are virtually identical with Elijah ( Yahwe is God, or, my God ). Compare the royal name Iluma-ilu, llu is god, where the second ilu takes the place of this king s special deity (KB 884, Hommel,

i. Abraham s chief slave and steward (Gen. ISa). The clause in which he is referred to is a piece of E s work and perhaps originally followed v. -$0. (Bu. ). It states that Abram s most trusted servant, in lieu of a son, would inherit his property (cp i Ch. 234^). It should be noticed, however, that the other narrator (J) does not give the name Eliezer (see 242), and the text is evidently in some disorder. The most probable way of emending seems to be to read yy> ^,-TN J3!T31 and my tent-dwelling will be deserted (see Che. Exp. T.. 11 47 [Oct. 99]).

Kalisch thought that the full name of the steward was Danunesek Eliezer, and RV implies the same theory. Gram matically the rendering is Dammesek Eliezer ((5 OL , euros Aafj.a<TK.o<; EAie(Jep) is no doubt inevitable ; but how absurd it is ! The text, therefore, must be incorrect. The words pi; ^ *"!, he (or it) is Damascus, are taken by some to be an intrusive marginal gloss on the word pOB which the glossator misunder stood (although it is difficult to see how he would have construed Tl 3 pt?Q~l Kin)- So, long ago, Hitzig and Tuch ; unfortunately the existence of a word pjs O (or ^B D) possession is extremely doubtful. Hall s rendering and he who will possess my house is a Damascene Eliezer, is not much more plausible than that of Hitzig. See Exp. 7 ., I.e. T. K. C.

z. Second son of Moses and Zipporah (Ex. 222), so called because the God of my father was my help (184). The Chronicler assigns him an only son Rchabiah (i Ch. 23 I5 17 26 25 /). See ELEAZAK (i), n.

3. A prophet, b. Dodavah of Mareshah, temp. Jehoshaphat :

2 Ch. 20 37 (eAeiaSo. [B]). Gray (I/PN 232) suggests that the name may have been derived from a good historical record ; but the prophets of Chronicles are often of such doubtful historicity that the suggestion seems hazardous. Was not the name more probably suggested by Eleazar b. Dodai (or Dodo) in 28. 23 9 iCh. 11 12? See ELKAZAR (3).

(sp ri^K ; eAiAcp [B], eN& P e<J> [A], eAl<\B [L] ; true name perhaps Elihaph [cp @ i! ], i.e. , God is Haph [Apis, see AIMS], of which Elihoreph may be an alteration on religious grounds ; cp Ahi- shahar, from Ahi-hur? so Marquart), one of Solomon s scribes, son of Shisha (i K. 4s). The text of vv. 1-20, however, is in much disorder, and v. 3 needs emendation. } r . 2 promises a list of princes. The first prince (v. 2) is Azariah, son of the priest Zadok. The next should be Elihoreph (Elihaph?) and Ahijah sons of Shavsha the secretary ( Klost. ). See SHAVSHA.

T. K. c.

1 The final N is omitted in i Ch. 20? (Kt.), 27 18 (Kt.), and once or twice in Jon.

2. b. Tohu, in the genealogy of Samuel (i S. ]i ijXetou [B], etAi [L]). Samuel s pedigree, however, is com posite (see JEROHAM [i], TOHU), and Elihu of the clan of Tahan (so, forTohu ; cpEi HKAiMi., 12) corresponds to ELK AN AH [q.v. , i] of the clan of Jerahmeel (so for Jeroham). In i Ch. 627 [12] Elihu is called ELIAB (q.v., 4) and in i Ch. 634[i9] Eliel (q.v., 6); whilst conversely ELIAB (q.v. , 3), David s eldest brother, seems to be called Elihu in i Ch. 27 18, where BAL reads Eliab. Perhaps some early divine name has been excised (in various ways) by editors ; the name, e.g. , may have been Elimelech (cp REGEM-MELECH beside RAAMIAII), and it is probable that this, rather than Elkanah, was the true name of Samuel s father. So Marq. Fund. 12 f.

(4s), HvX ; i.e. , Yahwe is God, 1 cp Joel ; HA[e]lAC [BAL, Ti. WH]) was among the greatest and most original of the Hebrew prophets ; indeed it is in him that Hebrew prophecy first appears as a great spiritual and ethical power, deeply affecting the destiny and religious character of the nation. He lived and worked under Ahab (circa 875-853), contending with heroic courage for Yahwe as the sole god of Israel, and refusing to make any terms with plans favoured at the royal court for uniting the worship of the national god with that of the Tyrian Baal. Thus he vindicated the true character of the religion of Israel, and is not unworthy of a place by the side of Moses. We shall be better able to appre ciate his position, however, when we have examined the legendary narratives in which his history is enshrined.

i. In i K. 17-19 we have a varied and singularly vivid account of his conflict with the foreign Baal-worship. It is from the hand of one who was a subject of the northern kingdom, and must therefore have written before the conquest of Samaria in 722 B.C. Otherwise in mentioning Beer-sheba (19s) he would scarcely have taken the pains to tell his readers that it belonged to Judah, or at least would not have expressed himself in that way. Again the type of his religious thought is clearly older than that of Hosea or even Amos. Not only does he speak, or make his hero speak, with reverence of Yahwe s altars in N. Israel (19 10), but, in spite of abundant occasion, he makes no protest against that worship of Yahwe under the accepted symbol of an ox, which provoked Hosea s bitter scorn. Accordingly, we may acquiesce in Kuenen s suggestion (Ond. i. 225) that he may have flourished in the ninth century, within a generation or two at furthest from the lifetime of Elijah. Only we must allow time for the creative work of popular fancy and the rise of partial misconception as to the points at issue in the deadly struggle.

1 [The statement that Elijah was of the inhabitants (rather, sojourners ) of Gilead is vague and improbable. Either we must read of Tishbeh in Gilead, or else (cp JABESH i., i) the whole description must be read thus, Elijah the Jabeshite, of Jabesh in Gilead (Klost.). The latter is the more probable view. In either case, the second part of the description seems to be a gloss]

The narrative has been mutilated at the beginning, and hence the abruptness with which the prophet appears on the scene : otherwise we might have attributed to dramatic art the sudden introduction, adapted as it is to the meteor-like character which Elijah s appearances preserve throughout. The story must have begun with some account of the quarrel and its origin in Ahab's religious innovations ; but the editor of the Book of Kings had already given an account of Ahab s defection (1629-34) in his own way and naturally refrained from explaining the matter over again in the words of the older document which he used. Hence Elijah of Tishbeh in Gilead ( BAL 17 1; but cp JABESH [i.]) is brought at once before us as if we were already familiar with him and with his cause. 1 He confronts the king with a message from Yahwe before whom he stands in constant service. No rain or dew is to fall for these years save at the prophet s will or declaration. Straight way the scene changes to a lonely wady called Cherith (?) (so most ; but see CHERITH). Here, in or near the wild and pastoral land of his birth, Elijah is shielded for a time from the famine which followed the drought. Ravens, forgetting their natural voracity, bring him bread and flesh morning and evening. Thus his supply of food was constant and beyond the needs of life in the East, where flesh is eaten only on festal occasions. In time, however, the stream of water fails, and Elijah at the bidding of his God passes beyond Yahwe s land to Zarephath, a Phosnician city to the S. of Sidon (but here again the name and situation of Elijah s place of refuge is disputable : see ZAREPHATH). At the gate of the city, where markets were held and remnants might be strewed about, a widow, who worshipped Yahwe 1 (i K. 171224), was gathering sticks. Water she gives at the prophet s request, but being asked for bread, protests that she has but a handful of meal and a little oil, with which she is about to prepare for her son and herself the last food they will ever eat. Finally, however, she does the prophet s bidding and is rewarded by the fulfilment of his promise that neither meal nor oil shall fail while the drought lasts. Nay, when her son dies, not of famine but of natural sickness, the man of God bending over the corpse brings back by his prayer the life which had fled.

Elijah returns to Israel at the divine command and meets the prefect of the palace, Obadiah. This courtier, who 'feared Yahwe' and had saved the lives of a hundred prophets from the fury of Ahab's queen, was engaged like his royal master in seeking fodder for Ahab s horses and mules. He falls down in reverence before the prophet, but refuses to consent to let Ahab know where Elijah is, till the prophet has sworn that he will keep his tryst, instead of suffering himself, after his work is finished, to be carried away by the spirit of Yahwe and thus leave Obadiah to bear the brunt of Ahab s disappointment. Is it thou, says Ahab, thou troubler of Israel ? I have not troubled Israel, is the fearless answer, but thou and thy father s house, in that ye have forsaken Yahwe and thou hast followed the Baalim. Thereupon Elijah, the solitary champion of Yahwe, challenges the 450 prophets of Baal ( the 400 prophets of the Asherah have been added by an interpolator in 1819 and in the <S BL text of v. 22) to a memorable contest (see CARMEL, 3 ; DANCING, 5). One bullock is to be laid on the wood for Baal, another for Yahwe, and the god who without human aid kindles the fire of his sacrifice is to be the God i.e. , the sole recognised God of Israel. In vain Baal s prophets invoke him with wild dances and cries, and gash themselves with knives to appease the burning fury of the sun-god, while Elijah mocks their pains. Then they desist and at Elijah s prayer the lightning of Yahwe consumes the victim on his altar and licks up the water which had been poured over and round the altar to enhance the marvel. Baal s prophets are slain by the Kishon, and now that the heart of the people is turned back, the rain will come.

Already the prophet listens in spirit to its welcome splash. As yet in spirit only. He crouches down on Carmel with his face between his knees, and his servant, sent to look seawards from the highest point, returns six times, and can but report that 'there is nothing.,' The seventh time he sees a cloud 'as small as a man's hand. Soon the heavens are black the king drives at full speed to Jezreel, fleeing before the terror of the storm. Borne by Yahwe s hand, Elijah runs on foot the whole distance of something like 16 m., but, true to his Bedouin instincts, refrains from entering the city.

1 [It is usual to suppose that the widow was of a strange religion ; so e.g. Strachan in Hastings, DB 1 688 b. This, at any rate, cannot be proved by her words Yahwe thy God, which are merely an acknowledgment of the superior religious standing of the prophet (i S. 15 30 2 K. 194).]

The momentary triumph at Carmel does but fan the persecuting zeal of Jezebel ; and Elijah sets out for Horeb, as if Yahwe had forsaken his land and with drawn to his ancient dwelling-plnce. In the wilderness beyond Beersheba (see MIZRAIM, 26), weary and desperate, he sits down under one of the retem bushes (the retem is a species of broom ; see JUNIPER) common in that region and prays for death. The angel of Yahwe, however, bids him rise and eat. He finds at his head a cruse of water and a cake baked on the coals, and in the strength of that he travels for forty days and nights to Horeb, the mountain of God. (If the text is right 1 the narrator is remarkably vague here, for the distance between the southern boundary of Palestine and the Sinaitic peninsula is only about 50 geographical in. , and the earlier view of Horeb made it not very far from the S. border of Canaan. ) Here on the sacred mount, when hurricane, earthquake, and lightning have cooled the air, Elijah in the rustling of a gentle breeze discerns Yahwe s presence. He had believed that the cause which he had held dearer than life was lost, and that he had better cease the unavailing struggle and die. Not so. He is to anoint new kings and inaugurate new dynasties for Damascus and Samaria. He is to anoint Elisha as his own successor. Each of these changes is to hasten the calamity which hangs over Israel, and only the 7000 who have not bowed the knee to Baal are to escape. Here, as at the beginning, the narrative fails us a second time. We do indeed learn how Elijah calls Elisha to the prophetic office ; but in the text of the Book of Kings as it has come down to us, Elisha takes no part in the deeds of violence which brought Hazael and Jehu to the throne. On the early and very striking story of Elijah s ascent (2 K. 2) see ELISHA, 3 ; and on the true scene of the legendary narrative in i K. 171-78-24 194-i8, see CHERITH, ZAREPHATH, JUNIPER.

2. Little need be said concerning the prediction of Ahaziah s death when he consulted Baal-zebub of Ekron in his sickness, and the fire from heaven which consumed two companies of soldiers sent to arrest the prophet. The story (2 K. la-i/) with its perverse supernaturalism and sanguinary spirit may safely be assigned to a period when the true notion of prophecy had grown confused and dim. The portrait of Elijah with his robe of goat's or camel s hair and his leathern girdle is, perhaps, the solitary fragment of genuine tradition which it contains. Very different in value and in date is the striking history of Naboth's judicial murder in i K. 21 1-18 20 (to be compared with and partially corrected by 2 K. 925/1). Naboth, probably on religious grounds, refused to sell his ancestral vineyard at the king s desire. He was condemned, on a false charge of treason against the god and the king of Israel, by the elders of his city ; for the kingly power in Israel was no Oriental despotism, and the authority of the city sheiks, who had replaced the sheiks of the tribes, had to be respected (cp GOVERNMENT, 24). Death was the penalty, and it fell, according to the custom of the time, not only on himself but also on his family. There was a judgment, however, higher than that of the earthly court. In after- days Jehu remembered how he heard the divine sentence pronounced against the unrighteous king : I have seen yesterday the blood of Naboth and his sons it is the oracle of Yahwe and I will requite thee on this plat.

1 [Wi. (67 1 29 n.) plausibly suggests that forty days and forty nights are a later insertion. A later glossator, who may have had a different view of the general situation of Sinai, can more easily be accused of geographical vagueness than the original narrator.]

3. Such in brief outline are the early legends of the prophet s life, but we have still to estimate the residuum of authentic history and through the mist of tradition to see the prophet as he was. We must not charge Ahab with conscious apostasy from Yahwe. He had great merits as well as great faults. He was a chival rous and patriotic king, and in the very names which he gave to his children he professed his allegiance to the god of his people. Nor can we believe that even Jezebel seriously endeavoured to exterminate Yahwe s prophets. Some four hundred of them gathered round her husband at the muster for his last and fatal cam paign (i K. 226), and the success of Jehu s revolution proves that only a very small minority of Israelites could have devoted themselves to the foreign worship. Ahab, however, did build a temple of Baal in his capital. No doubt it seemed to him the natural and fitting acknow ledgment and consecration of the alliance between Israel and Tyre. Elijah would brook no such amalgam of worships radically diverse. He was not indeed a monotheist after the fashion of the later prophets. To him Yahwe was the sole god of Israel, in whose land Yahwe was all or nothing. No wonder then that he looked on the drought as a sign of Yahwe s anger. Here by the way we are on firm ground. The fact of the drought is attested independently by Menander of Kphesus (ap. Jos. Ant. viii. 182), according to whom, however, it lasted only one year and was stayed by a procession of Phoenician priests (cp HISTORICAL LIT. , 5).

Elijah s devotion to Yahwe was something infinitely higher than mere patriotic attachment to hereditary religion. To him Yahwe and Baal represented two principles viz. , worship of national righteousness and the sensual worship of nature. Again, the sons of the prophets, like bands of dervishes, stirred the enthusiasm of the people, and encouraged them to believe that Yahwe must fight for Israel. Elijah, in the best and earliest accounts, stands alone or with a single disciple. He saw Yahwe s work not so much in national victory as in national calamity. He was able to believe that Hazael, the scourge of Israel, had been raised to power by Yahwe himself. Thus he opened a new era in the religion of Israel. Malachi speaks of him, 823 [4 5], as the minister of judgment and purification within Israel, the herald of Yahwe s great and terrible day. )esus beheld the spirit of Elijah revived in the stern and solitary Baptist, and on the holy mount Moses and Elijah, representing the law and the prophets, bore conjoint testimony to the transfigured Christ. For the closing scene of Elijah s life, see ELISHA, 3.

A few words, supplementary to the article KINGS ( 8), may be added on recent criticism of the Elijah-narratives. The late character of the narratives in 2 K l:2-17 is generally admitted ; but Kautzsch in his essay on the Book of Kings in Ersch and Gruber (Allgem. Encyk. ) attributes the rest of the biography to one writer.

On the other hand Wellhausen and Kuenen separate 1 K. 17-19 21, where the prophet stands alone, from 2 K. 2i-i8 (which, however, Kuenen observes, can hardly be much later than i K. 17-19) where, instead of being a wanderer, he has a home with Elisha at Gilgal, and where, too, he is associated with the sons of the prophets. Further, Kuenen separates i K. 17-19, where Elijah contends against Baal-worship, from 21 where the contest turns upon a judicial murder without so much as a passing allusion to foreign idolatry. The reason is far from cogent, and there is a similarity of language between 17 17 and 21 1, 18 1 and 21 17 (cp Benzinger, p. 106). In St. Kr., 1892, Rosch has endeavoured to show (cp Stade, GVK^ 1522, n. ) that all the narratives are post-exilic, a theory which in the face of the reasons given above seems absolutely untenable (cp KINGS, 8 ; Konig, Einleitung, 266).

[In Moslem traditions Elijah is identified with the mythical personage el-Hadir i.e., the evergreen or youthful prophet (for fables see Weiland, Legenden, 177) who has become the guardian of the seas, but was at an earlier time spoken of as dwelling at the confluence of two seas (rivers?), as the guide of the Israelites at the Exodus (equivalent therefore to the Pillar of fire and cloud). Originally he was probably the rescued hero of the Deluge-story. See DELUGE, 15 (col. 1062), and cp Clermont-Ganneau, Key. arch. 32388^]

The monographs on Elijah are mostly out of date. His life and character are given from a critical point of view in the recent Histories of Israel by Stade (vol. i.), Kittel (vol. ii.), and Wellhausen ; also in Smend's AT Relig. (152 ff.^\ 175^). See also Cheyne s Hallowing of Criticism ( 88), and Gunkel s article on Elijah, Preuss.Jahrb. 98, pp. 18-51. On the apocryphal Apocalypse of Elijah and its interesting connection with i Cor. 2 9 and Eph. 5 14, see Harnack s Altchristliche Litt. 853^, and APOCRYPHA, 20. Fabricius, Cod. Pseudepigrapk. VJ\ 1070^, has illustrated the place of Elijah in Jewish folklore.

(Ni2 > ?N ; probably corrupt). In the first of the two lists of David s thirty we find (2 S. 2825 MT) Elika the Harodite (rather, Aradite). This item is absent from (5 BL (but <S A gives evaKa), and from the list in i Ch. 11. Hence Driver (note on 2 S. 2839) would omit it, thus making the number of David s minor heroes exactly thirty, but reducing the total of the heroes (including in this the five major ones) to thirty-five. The total given in v. 39 may be due to a late editor. Marquart (Fund. 19) agrees, regarding Elika the Harodite as an (incorrect) gloss on v. 33^. Wellhausen and Budde, however, retain Elika the Harodite, remarking that the framer of the list likes, when he can, to couple two warriors from the same district. (Arad and Beth-palet, however, may very well be combined. ) Another name, it is true, is still wanting to produce a total of thirty-seven. See ELIPHELET, 2, and cp DAVID, ii a, i. T. K. c.

(D^N; AiAeiM [BAL]; Elim ; Ex. 15 27, Nu. 889), the second station of the Israelites after crossing the sea, where there were twelve fountains and seventy palms (the term Elim covers palm-trees ; see ELATH). On the usual theory of the route of the Israelites, Elim is now generally identified with the beautiful oasis in Wady Gharandel, 63 m. from Suez, 7 from Ain Hawwara (Ordnance Survey of Sinai , 1 151).

(D?D^N, God is a deliverance, 30 ; eA[e]l({>&AeT [ANL]. According to Cheyne a similar name, Ahiphelet, was borne by the Gilonite, David s treacherous counsellor, /<//, deliverance, being altered by tradition into tophel i.e. , lit. , brother of insipidity or folly ; cp 2 S. 1531).

i. A son of David born to him in Jerusalem (z S. 5 16 i Ch. 38 147). According to 2 S. , David had eleven sons born to him in Jerusalem ; but by a textual error (which occurs also in (5 BL of S. ) this number is increased to thirteen, by the addition of NOGAH and another Kliphelet: i Ch. 36 14 5 (oSs^K, ELPALET [AV], ELPELET [RV]). The latter is omitted by Bertheau, Thenius, and Wellhausen (Gesch.W, 216, ET it. ).

z. One of David s thirty (2 S. 2834 ; in i Ch. 11 35 the name is given by error without the last letter : MT Eliphal, VET^N)- The name of his father is variously given as Ahasbai (28. in MT) and as Ur (i Ch. in MT) ; see DAVID, n (a) i. /

Both forms, however, are evidently corrupt ; and to recover the original name we must not (with We.) omit * the son of before the Maachathite. p and 713, ri3 and ri 3 were easily confounded; the words which now follow 3DnN, Ahasbai, in MT should probably be read (according to Klo.) n3JPB,Tn 3, a man of Beth-maachah. And, if Klo. is right in supplying HEPHER (ii., i) before the gentilic noun, we can hardly doubt that he is right also in regarding ^onN 73 (EV son of Ahasbai ) as a corruption of a gentilic noun formed similarly to r)3J?Cn"n % 3- If SC S tne original list ran thus, Eli- phelet, a man of Beth - ; Hepher, a man of Beth-maachah. The number thirty-seven in 2 S. 23 39 is thus accounted for (Che.). The Ur of i Ch. might be a corrupt fragment of the lost place-name. For a more tentative view see Driver, Sam., 284, and for a bolder but very ingenious view Marquart, Fund. 22. The versions are equally obscure (2 S. 2834; aAei^oAefl [B], <>4>eAAt [L.I ; i Ch. 11 35, e\<j,ar [BN], eAic^aaA [A], -<J>aeA [L]).

Elijah s successor in his prophetic work, and for about half a century the father and guide of the northern kingdom in its struggle for national life and independence. We have in the books of Kings a considerable collection of anecdotes illustrating his history. We cannot be surprised that much of this material from which we have to construct our view of the manner of man he was, bears clear marks of its legendary nature. In this respect the traditions about Elisha do not differ from those about his master (cp HISTORICAL LITERATURE, 5). Unfortunately, however, in the case of Elisha it is much harder to recover the kernel of literal fact, and we miss the clear and bold lines in which the portrait of the true Elijah stands out on the canvas. The difference springs from the vastly superior origin ality of Elijah. The ideas which came straight to the master s heart were taught to the disciple by outward word and example. He learnt as others might learn. Moreover, he sympathised more than Elijah had done with the natural thoughts and desires of his countrymen, and was much more on a level with them. For these reasons there is great difficulty in distinguishing the genuine history of Elisha from the overgrowth of popular imagination.

Reference is made elsewhere (see KINGS, BOOKS OF, 8) to the disorder and chronological confusion, which characterise the bundle of anecdotes on Elisha s life. It may be well to add a few details.

In 2 K. 5 the story of Naaman s cure implies that the rela tions between the Aramaean and the Israelite kingdoms were ostensibly peaceable. Then, without any explanation of the change, we are introduced in 68-23 to tne very midst of the warfare between the nations. In the closing verse of this section we are told that the Aramaeans made no further invasion of Israelite territory, whereupon in 624 we find the Aramaean king besieging Samaria. In 5 26 ./I Gehazi, Elisha s servant, is said to have been struck with life -long leprosy, which, however, does not offer any obstacle to his familiar intercourse with the king in 8 1-6.

There is no unity therefore in the stories as a whole, though some of them are, no doubt, connected with each other (so 816 48-37 38-41 42-44. See also KINGS, 8). Further, it is uncertain whether the editor made his selection on any definite principle, for the assertion that he has related twelve and only twelve miracles of Elisha cannot be maintained save on an arbitrary method of reckoning. In any case he failed to under stand Elisha s connection with contemporary events. By placing all the anecdotes, with one exception, before Jehu s revolt, he has reduced the greater part of Elisha s public life to a mere blank. Yet how energetic and fruitful in result that life was, we learn with unimpeach able evidence from the exclamation of the king who stood by the aged prophet s death-bed (2 K. 1814).

Nevertheless the stories, despite their legendary char acter, are early in date. They belong to the literature of the Northern Kingdom and to the eighth century B.C. Thus, even when they cannot claim to be treated as. sober history, they are of great value for the light they throw on the manners and beliefs which prevailed at the time when they were written ; and sometimes at least we are justified in the confidence that we have before us fragments of tradition which will bear the test of criticism.

Elisha was the son of Shaphat and belonged to ABEL-MEHOLAH (q.v. ) : it was there that Elijah found him. The meeting occurred some time after Elijah's return from Horeb, for the route from Horeb to Damascus (i K. 19 15) would not lead through Abel-meholah, and the word thence in v. 19 must refer to some place mentioned in a section of the narrative which stood between w. 18 and 19, but has been omitted by the editor. Elisha had twelve pair of oxen ploughing in the field before him, and was himself driving the twelfth pair. This implies that he was a man of substance, and far (therefore) from the common temptation to prophesy for a piece of bread (Am. 7 12). Still, when Elijah threw his mantle upon him, he was ready to leave all and only asked leave to bid his parents farewell. The leave was given, but with the added warning to remember the sacred service to which he was now bound by the fact that Elijah had thrown his mantle over him (for this seems to be the meaning of the obscure words in i K. 19 20). Returning, Elisha slew the oxen, kindled a fire with the wood of the plough, and made a sacrificial meal for the people about him. From that time forth he was known as Elijah s disciple, as one who had poured water on his hands (2 K. 3n). His call had come mediately, through Elijah, not immediately from Yah we. So also by Elijah s instrumentality he was perfected for the graver and more independent duties which awaited him when his master was gone.

He is said to have followed his master, when his end was near, from Gilgal in the centre of Palestine ! to the sanctuary of Bethel and thence to Jericho. Elijah smites the Jordan with his mantle and the two comrades cross dry-shod. Ask what I shall do for thee, says Elijah, before I am taken from thee. The disciple indulges no idle hope of becoming a second Elijah ; but he would receive a double portion of his master s spirit i.e., the portion of the first-born, comparing himself with other sons of the prophets, not with his and their mighty father. Even that is a hard thing to ask ; but he is to gain this pre-eminence if he is enabled to behold the parting form, as it is borne upward in the storm and lightning. He sees the wondrous ascent ; he gazes on his father till he vanishes in the height, and rends his clothes in grief for his bereavement. Then he lifts the mantle which had fallen from the ascending prophet s shoulders, smites the river with it and divides the waters in the strength of Elijah s God. Other members of the prophetic guild seek anxiously for their lost leader in hill and dale. Elisha has the calm assurance that Elijah is gone and that he is the heir.

The ascension of Elijah introduces a group of miracles. One miracle is stern and cruel ; he curses the youths at Bethel who mock him, and forty- two of them are devoured by two she-bears (223-25). Another has at least a penal character ; Gehazi is struck with life-long leprosy for his covetous- ness (52o_^). The rest are deeds of beneficence.

Elisha heals with salt the waters of Jericho (2 19-22), makes poisonous gourds (see GOURDS [WILD]) wholesome by sprink ling meal upon them in time of famine (4 38-41), multiplies bread to feed a hundred guests (442-44) and oil to save the poor widow of a prophet from the creditor who would have seized her sons for debt and made them slaves (4 1-7) ; he brings the bor rowed axe up from the river-bed and makes it swim on the water (6 1-7). With exquisite tact he enters into the sorrows of the Shunamite woman who had given him hospitable enter tainment, and restores the life of the son whose very birth had been a token of the prophet s power and gratitude (4 8-37). He cleanses the leprosy of NAAMAN (?.v.) the Aramaean statesman (chap. 5) ; and even after he has been laid in the grave the touch of his bones restores a dead man to life (13 20 f.)

It may be noted that these miracles are in part connected with the prophetic colonies, that they are modelled to some extent on the wonders ascribed to Elijah (cp 2 K. 2 14 with v. 8 ; 2 K. \ ff. with i K. Vl^ff. ; 2 K. 432/1 with i K. 17 ^ff. ; 2 K. 810^ with 14), and that so far as they embody the spirit of active love, they contribute a Christ-like element (which is missed, however, in Ecclus. 48 12-14) to the ideal of prophecy.

1. 2 K. 21. We have assumed that the Gilgal here intended is Jiljilia SW. of Shiloh. See further, GILGAL, 4. If we identify Elisha s Gilgal with the famous sanctuary by the Jordan, then we must suppose that there is some confusion in the text, and make Elisha start from his home in Samaria. Robertson Smith (KINGS, BOOKS OF, in EB) held this to be the original intention of the narrator (see v. 25).

Though both Elisha and his master were wonder workers and champions of Yahwe s exclusive worship, Elisha's career presents points of marked contrast to that of Elijah. Instead of appearing and disappearing like a meteor flash, Elisha could be found readily enough by the people who consulted him in the leisure of New Moons and Sabbaths (2 K. 423), or by princes who sought him in person (2 K. 812 633). The strife with Baal was over and Elisha exercised decisive power in court and camp. Thus, Elisha accompanied the combined armies of Israel, Judah and Edom, then a vassal state under Judah, in an ex pedition against Moab, and saved them from perishing of thirst.

The story is historical in substance (cp JEHORAM, g "$/.) The allied army marched round the Dead Sea and crossing the Nahal ha- Arabim (see ARABAH ii.) attacked Moab from the S. This was just the course which would suggest itself. Moab, as we now know from Mesha s altar-stone, had recovered and fortified cities on the N., the Arnon presented an obstacle to invasion from that quarter, and the Aramaeans farther N. still might have cut off all possibility of retreat. Dig trenches on trenches in this valley, said the prophet, a rational method of reaching the water which filters through the sand to the rock beneath, and one which still gives its name to the Wady el- Ahsa at the S. end of the Dead Sea (see W. R. Smith, OTJCV) 147). We may perhaps doubt whether the Moabites really mistook the water under the sun for blood shed in the quarrel of the allies among themselves, though Stade (GVI 1 536) sees no reason to question the truth of even this feature in the narrative.

For his political influence, however, Elisha paid a heavy penalty. He felt, and was sometimes worsted by, the temptation to use means which his predecessor would surely have disdained. We may, indeed, on consider ing the relations between Samaria and Damascus, question the representation in 87-15 that he was largely responsible for the murder of Ben-hadad by Hazael ; but he certainly was a prime mover in the revolt by which the crafty and murderous Jehu, a man with no character for religion (note especially 10 18), seized the throne of Israel (see JEHU). He bore a nobler part under other kings of Jehu s line.

If we follow Kuenen s plausible conjecture (Onderzoek, 1 2, 25, n. 12, but see JEHORAM, 2), it was in the time of Jehoahaz that the Aramaeans besieged Samaria, till the famine within the walls made women devour their children, and the king, despairing of help from Vahwe and attributing the evil to Elisha s supernatural power, sought the prophet s life. Elisha, we are told, with a confidence like that of Isaiah, predicted victory and plenty. His prophecy was fulfilled ; the Aramaeans, terrified by a rumour that their own land was invaded (see JEHORAM, 2), fled and left their supplies behind.

There came a turn in the tide. The Aramceans, struggling for life against Ramman-nirari III., could no longer hope to subjugate Israel ; and Elisha, now stricken in years, saw in spirit the dawn of a brighter day.

It is said that on his death-bed he bade king Joash stand by the open window and shoot an arrow eastward. The prophet laid his own aged hands on the hands of the young king, and cried, as the arrow sped : An arrow of Yahwe s victory ; yea, an arrow of victory over Aram. Moreover he told the king to strike the ground with the arrows and when he did so declared it was the sign of three battles to be won, chiding him, however, because he did not double the strokes and so double his success against the foe.

Well might Joash lament over Elisha : My father, my father ! Israel s chariots and horsemen (art thou) ! His guiding and animating spirit had been worth many a troop to his people. Here lay Elisha s strength and here also its limitations. No new idea came to the birth through him. He was a faithful disciple, a true patriot, a man of loving heart. He worked for Israel, scarcely through Israel for the world ; and it is not, perhaps, by mere accident that in the NT he is mentioned only once (Lk. 427).

All the modern histories of Israel especially those of Stade, Kittel, and Wellhausen treat of Elisha; Smend, AT Relig., also may be consulted. w. E. A.

(ilKN ; eA[e]ic& [BADEL], in L of Gen. 104, eAlCC6.). a son f Javan, occurs elsewhere only in the combination N *?.N, Ezek. 27?, coast-lands of Elishah (ismccoN eA[e]iCAl [BAQ]), whence violet and purple stuffs were brought to Tyre. The two most plausible identifications are that with S. Italy and Sicily, where were Greek colonies (Kiepert, Lag., Di., Kau. ; cp TIRAS, end), and that with Carthage or, more widely, the N. African coast (Schulthess, Stade, E. Meyer \GA, 1282]). Both regions were famous for the purple dye (cp PURPLE). The latter is favoured by the name ; Elissa, princess of Tyre, was the legendary founder of Carthage, which was perhaps originally called Elissa. On the other side Dillmann quotes the gloss in Syncellus, Elissa, whence the Sicelots ( Atercra ^ oO cri/ce\ot ; Eus. Chron. Arnten. 213); but this seems to tell against the identification of Elishah and Sicily.

Dillmann urges that Carthage, being a Phoenician colony, would not be represented as descended from Japheth ; but this would have as much force against Tarshish or Tartessus (cp TIRAS). It may be granted, however, that N "K, coast-lands of Elishah, would be perhaps more natural of S. Italy and Sicily ; Tg. on Ezek. 27? indeed explains this phrase by the province of Italy. A decision is difficult ; but perhaps Carthage has the more in its favour. F. B.

3. Another son of David, mentioned in i Ch. 36 (eAi<ra [B]) = aS. 615 i Ch. 14s, EI.ISHUA, which name should be restored here, as it is scarcely conceivable that two of David s sons should bear the same name. See DAVID, n_(rf). _

(inK^X, God is an oath, or perhaps rather God is health (Che.), see ABISHUA, ELISHUA, and cp BATHSHEBA, BATHSHUA; similarly ELISABETH, JEHOSHEBA, 33, 50 ; eA[e]ic&Be9 [BL], -Ber [A], -Be [A*F]), wife of Aaron and daughter of Amminadab {Ex. 623!?). She is also styled sister of NAHSHON, and Nahshon b. Amminadab in P is the well-known chief of Judah in the desert march. P hardly derived the Aaronids from a Judahite mother. Sister of Nahshon is, therefore, most probably a gloss (Rp) which has arisen from a confusion of Elisheba s father with the Judahite. It was, possibly, to avoid this con fusion that the writer of i Ch. 622 [7] mentions a son of Kohath (Aaron s grandfather) named Amminadab, whose place, however, is elsewhere taken by Izhar (cp ib. 28). The tribal connection of Aaron s wife, there fore, is as obscure as that of the wife of his famous son ELEAZAR [q.v., i].

The name Elisheba may well be pre-exilic (see, Gray, HPN, 206), and with regard to the difficult question of the origin of Levitical names it may be pointed out that in this case a name of parallel formation is borne by a devout follower of Yahwe, the wife of the priest Jehoiada of Judah. See JEHOSHEBA.

1. The father of the prophet Samuel (i S. li). He was the son of Jerahmeel (see JKKOHAM [i]) according to one form of the genealogy of Samuel ; but the name of Samuel s father is also traditionally given (it would seem) as Elihu or rather (see ELIHU, 2) Elimelech.

2. Eponym of one of the three divisions of the Korahite Levites (Ex. 624; see KORAH [3]), the others being ASSIR (i) and ABIASAPH. In i Ch. 6 the genealogy of the sons of Korah is given in two forms, both differing from that of Exodus, and Samuel s father is represented as a descendant of the Korahite Elkanah. This may mean either that the descendants of Samuel were actually incorporated after the exile in the Korahite guild under the name of sons of Elkanah, and that an older Elkanah, son of Korah, was inserted to give symmetry to the genealogical tree, or simply that the Korahite guild of Elkanah was led by its name to claim kinship with the prophet Samuel and incorporate his ancestors in its genealogy. See GENEALOGIES i. ,

7(i i.)-

3. A Levite : i Ch. 9 16 (i)Aai>a [B]).

4. One of David s warriors, i Ch. 126 (qAxava [BAL]). See DAVID, ii (a).

(^p^NH, Ginsb., with most MSS and editions ; "WppKn, Baer, with the small MS Massora; ^p^NH and ^p ^XH also are found in most MSS.; eAKeCAlOC [BKAQ]), a gentilic noun, derived from Elkosh, the name of the town to which the prophet Nahum belonged (Nah. li).

According to Peiser [ZA TW, 7 349 ( 97)], the word contains the name of the deity, jyjp [cp KISH], which he finds likewise in the name Kushaiah [i Ch. 1617], and in Prov. 8031 [he reads Sfrp*?* for DIpSx]).

Three sites have been proposed.

a. There is an el-Kus not far from the left bank of the Tigris, two days journey N. of the ancient Nineveh, where the grave of the prophet Nahum is pointed out. According to Friedrich Delitzsch and A. Jeremias, 1 this is the place referred to in Nah. 1 1. This theory involves the assumption that Nahum belonged to the ten tribes and was born in exile, and has been thought to be favoured by the prophet s (presumed) accurate know ledge of local details respecting Nineveh. On the one hand, however, the N. Israelitish exiles were not settled in Assyria proper (2 K. 176 18 n), and we find no trace in Nahum of any hope of a return home such as an exile would certainly have expressed somewhere (cp Kue. , Ond.W ii. , 75, n. 4) ; and, on the other, quite enough was known of Assyria in Palestine in the time of Nahum to enable a prophet of such power to sketch the picture that we have in chap. 2. We must rather suppose that it was at a later day that the graves of the two prophets who prophesied against Nineveh were sought in the neighbourhood of that city. Whilst a resting-place for Jonah was found in Nineveh itself (Nebi Yunus), the village called el-Kus seemed, in view of Nah. 1 1, to be appropriate for the grave of Nahum. That there was a village there, however, in the seventh century B. C. cannot be shown. The earliest reference to it, according to Jeremias, is in the eighth century A.D. ; nor is the grave mentioned before the sixteenth.

1 See the treatise by Billerbeck and Jeremias cited under NAHUM (beg.).

b. A ruined site in Galilee, Elcese, was shown to Jerome as the birthplace of the prophet, and is attested, with slight variations, as E\/ce<re also by the Greek fathers. As t\Keffaios is also the form of the name in Nah. 1 1 (f\Kaifffov [N*], -KCfffov [K c - b ]) il is possible that nrp^N was a collateral form by the side of ppW (Kue. ), or, rather, that the name of Nahum s birthplace was ntyp^N, not t?pW Indeed, since the l of the scriptio plena is in no case binding, e p jKn might itself be read B>p^Krt and derived from nerj)h- In this case the name would have nothing to do with the deity B*?p. If, then, the tradition reported by Jerome be cor rect, we must suppose that Nahum, assuming that he lived in the seventh century (see NAHUM, 2), was born in Galilee amongst the Israelites left there in 722, and then, as the book itself refers us to Judaea, removed thither at a later date (cp further CAPERNAUM, i, 5). c. Against the statement of Jerome, however, is to be set that of the Vita Prophetarum of Pseudo-Epiphanius. The text of the latter is indeed unfortunately very un settled, and in its common form the eX/cecret of Nahum is located E. of the Jordan. Nestle, however, has made it very probable that lopSdvov eh is due to a corruption of the text, and that the genuine text says that Elkese lay beyond Betogabra ( = ELEUTHEROPOLIS, the mod. Bet Jibrln) in the tribe of Simeon (ZDPV 1 2-22 ff. [ 78]; transl. inPEFQ, 1879, PP- 136-138 ; cp Marg. u. Mat.226/., 43 /f [ 93]). Beyond question a place in Judah would be much more in harmony with the age and contents of the book (cp We. A7. Proph. 155 [( 3 >, 158], who asserts that Nahum was at all events a Judaean from Judah ), and it should likewise be con sidered that all similar names of places point to the S. viz., npnSx, fipffyf, iVwSx to the kingdom of Judah ; n.^y pK to the S. part of the trans-Jordanic district. Certainty is, however, unattainable. K. B.

OD|K, eAAACAR [D], ceAA. [A], eA<v [L], {m^f, Ponti [gen.]), the land or city and district ruled over by ARIOCH (Gen. 14 1). It was natural to think, with Mdnant and others, of Asur, the old capital of Assyria, and its territory. Ellasar might very well be a Hebrew transliteration of the Assyrian alu Asur (city of Asur) ; Assyrian (not Babylonian) / (a] is re presented in Hebrew by s (D). Most scholars, however, have rightly adopted Sir H. Rawlinson s view that Ellasar means Larsa or Larsam, the ancient Babylonian city of the sun-god, the ruins of which are still to be seen at Senkereh, (cp BABYLONIA, 3), because the name (Arioch) of the king is identified with Eri-aku, son of Kudur-mabuk, and vassal-king of Larsa. This, no doubt, requires one to assume either a slip on the part of the writer or a corruption of the text ; 1 but, since the narrator speaks of allies or vassals of the Elamitic over-king Chedorlaomer, it is clear that he must mean, not Asur, but Larsa. See Del. Par. 224, and, on the historical value of the account, CHEDORLAOMER, 4/.

c. P. T.

1 Ordinary processes will not account for the change of Larsa to Ellasar. If it were a Greek document, we could understand such a change better, as the Greeks take great liberties in the transcription of Semitic names; but the Hebrews are more accurate. [Ball (SBOT) suggests as the original -al Larsa*", the city of Larsa. ]

i. Grandfather (on the maternal side) of Jehoiachin ; designated, Elnathan of Jerusalem ; a K. 248 (e\Xa- va.6a.fj. [B], -/juQafj, [A], -vaOav [L]). Most probably the same as Elnathan b. Achbor, Jer. 8612 ([@ 44 12], twvaOav [B], v. [AQ*]), who was sent by Jehoiakim to fetch Uriah out of Egypt, Jer. 2622-24 ([8822-24], om. B), and is mentioned again in connection with the burning of Jeremiah s roll (8625 vaOav [A]).

2. Three men of this name are mentioned in Ezra 8 16. Two were chief men (Q<B-JO) and the third, one of the DTIID or teachers, RV (a\<avafi, eAi/a0af, eai/. [BA], eAii/., e\v. [L, who gives only two]). In i Esd. 844 there are only two names, ALNATHAN, RV ELNATHAN (evaarav [B]), and EUNATAN, a misprint which is corrected in the RV ENNATAN (twarav).

(fl? 11 ^, i.e., [sacred] oak, 69 ; cp ALLON). i. One of the cities assigned to Dan in Josh. 1943, where it is mentioned along with Shaalabbin, Aijalon, Timnah, and Ekron. (@ has : ai\wv [B], eX. [A], ia\. [L], but <@ L e\ui> for Aijalon in v. 42 a case of transposition. ) The site has not been identified ; but it is obviously to be looked for in or near the Valley of Sorek ( W. Sardr). The same Elon is referred to in i K. 4 9 (crit. emend.), where it follows Shaalbim and Bethshemesh. See ELON -BETH -HAN AN (where 65 s readings are given).

2. One of the six minor judges, most of whose names appear to be those of clans rather than of individuals (Moore, Judges, xxviii. ) : Judg. 12 n/. (Gin. pS N, Ba. J^N, euXwyu. [BL], -v [A] ; Ahialon}. Elon is really the heros eponymos of Aijalon (or rather Elon; see AIJALON, 2), in the land of Zebulun. The gentilic is Elonite, U^N ; Nu. 26 26 (aXXwv[e]i [BAF], aXaw [L]).

(PJITI II ji^N ; but some MSS have J2 for JV2, and others prefix 1 ; eAcoM 660C BH6AAMAN [B], AIAACOM 6COC BH0AN&N [A], AlAcON 660C BA.I6N&&M [L]). A name, or rather names, at the end of the description of Solomon s second prefec ture (i K. 4g). @ is probably right in reading . . . and Elon as far as B. (cp v. 12, end). Elon is prob ably the first ELON (i. , i) mentioned above, though it is also possible to read Aijalon. Beth-hanan, if a frontier town is meant, can hardly be right ; some well-known name is wanted.

Possibly we should, with Klostermann, read BETH-HORON, an important place, marked out by nature for a frontier-town. Conder s suggestion of Beit Anan (Socin, Bet Enan, a village 8J m. from Jerusalem, on the road to Jimzu (PEFM. 3 16), Beit Hanfin, 2 h. NE. of Gaza (BR 2371), may be mentioned.

(NpJjpK or npljfajt, Assyr. Al-ta-ku-u, eAGeKOO [A]), a town of the Judaean low land, mentioned with Ekron and Timnah, in the book of Joshua (1944, &AK&6<\ [B], eAGeKeiN [L]). was (21 23 eAKO>e<MM [B], eASeKA [L]) a Levitical city in the inheritance of Dan. It was taken and destroyed by Sennacherib on his way to Timnah and Ekron after his defeat of the Egyptian forces that had come to the help of the Ekronites (see his prism inscription, Schrader, KATW, 1717. , 289, 292 [ET, iS9/.. 282, 285]). The army overthrown by Sennacherib probably consisted of Jews as well as Ekronites and Egyptians, and a likely spot for them to unite and take their stand would be up the Wady Sarar (Vale of Sorek) on the high road between Ekron and Jerusalem, at the foot of the hills a position which equally suits the data in Joshua. Sennacherib might reach it from the coast and the neighbourhood of Joppa (where he was previously), by the vale of Aijalon and the easy pass from the latter to the Vale of Sorek. No trace of the name, however, has been discovered here or elsewhere. Khirbet Lezkd, 7 m. SW. of Ekron and near the great N. road (PEF map, Sh. xvi. ; see map to JUDAEA) suits the data of Sennacherib s inscription, but seems incompatible with those of Joshua. Beit Likia in Aijalon (Conder) is too far N. (cp Guthe, Zukunfts- bild d. Jesaia, 48). See CHRONOLOGY, 21.

(JpJftS : GeKOyM [B], eAOeKGN [AL]), a town in the hill-country of Judah (Josh. 1659), mentioned in a small group of six along with Halhul (Halhul), Beth-zur (Burj Sur) and Gedor (Jedur). The site is therefore to be sought, most probably, somewhere on or near the route from Hebron to Jerusalem. The reading 6eKovp. of B suggests that the element "? in this name was sometimes taken to represent the definite article (cp ELTOLAD). Some have thought of this Eltekon as the site of Sennacherib s victory of Altaku, and indeed, in spite of what Schrader says (JCATW, ijif.), the spelling of the latter is nearer Eltekon than Eltekeh ; but the geographical reasons he gives in favour of Eltekeh are well grounded. See ELTEKE.

(eAMyMAic [B]). i. In, i Mace. 6 1/ AV has, king Antiochus, travelling through the high countries, heard say that Elymais in the country of Persia was a city greatly renowned for riches, silver, and gold, and that there was in it a very rich temple, etc. (cp NANEA). RV, however, reads, . . . that in Elymais in Persia there was a city, etc. AV follows TR ; RV represents tv EXvpaiSi 4v rrj Ilfpaidi ; @ B reads ev eXi>/utis (eXi /nes [A]) tv rij irtpff. Whether RV is justified in adopting this text seems doubtful ; tv before eXu/iau may be the correction of a scribe who knew that there was no city bearing the name of Elymais. Polybius (31 n), it is true, states that the temple on which Antiochus had designs was in Elymais ; but 2 Mace. 92 places it at Persepolis, which was not in Elymais, but in Persia proper.

G. Hoffmann (Ausziige aus Syr. Akten Pers. Mdrtyrer, i-yzf.), quoting a passage TO TTJS AprefjuSof iepbv TO. \fapa, assumes that \\<Japa is the city referred to, and identifies Aapa with the Ar. Azar, which is in Khusistan, SE. of Susa, one day s journey on the road from Ram-hormuz to el-Ahwaz (cp al- Mukaddasi, ed. de Goeje ( 419 13). Possibly, however, the real name was one which admitted of being mutilated and corrupted so as to produce DT# Elam. Gratz (MGWJ, 1883, p. 241 ff.) seeks a clue in the obscure passage Dan. 1145; but it seems hazardous to assume that lyiEK (EV his palace, which does not suit >V.TN the tents of) is equivalent to Am^aSapo, the name of an Elamite city in Ptolemy, for Gratz himself holds that the rest of the clause is deeply corrupt. Compare, how ever, Vg. and Aq. in Dan. I.e. ; both take K to be a proper name. Elymais recurs in Tob. 2 10, where RV m e- certainly adopts the correct reading. For the statement that ACHIACHARUS went to Elymais (eh TT\V EX(X)i>/xcu3a [BNA] possibly et s yrji> E. ) support has been found in the semi-apocryphal romance which bears his name (Rendel Harris, Story of Ahikar, Iii.). Dillon, however, ingeniously suggests that the name has arisen from the underground cell the original narrative had some derivative of oSy in which Ahikar hides himself from the wrath of Sennacherib and Nadan (Contemp. Review, March 1898). It is to be noted that the allusion to Achiacharus has little bearing upon Tobit at least in its present form (see TOBIT).